{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_42964/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_42964","id":"gutenberg_42964","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42964","summary":null,"tags":["Animals in the Bible","Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: Nature/Gardening/Animals","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Nature in the Bible"],"text":"Transcriber's note:\n Spelling and punctuation inconsistencies have been harmonized.\n The original hyphenation and use of accented words has been\n retained. Obvious printer errors have been repaired. Italic text\n has been marked with _underscores_. Please see the end of this\n book for further notes. Bible references are as they are in the\n\t original book.\n\n\n\n\n [Illustration: THE OSTRICH.\n\n \"What time she lifteth up herself on high, she scorneth the horse and\n his rider.\"--JOB xxxix. 18.]\n\n\n\n\n BIBLE ANIMALS;\n\n BEING A DESCRIPTION OF\n EVERY LIVING CREATURE MENTIONED IN THE SCRIPTURES,\n FROM THE APE TO THE CORAL.\n\n BY THE\n\n REV. J. G. WOOD, M.A., F.L.S. ETC.,\n\n AUTHOR OF \"HOMES WITHOUT HANDS,\"\n \"COMMON OBJECTS OF THE SEA-SHORE AND COUNTRY,\" ETC.\n\n _WITH ONE HUNDRED NEW DESIGNS\n BY W. F. KEYL, T. W. WOOD, AND E. A. SMITH._\n\n ENGRAVED BY G. PEARSON.\n\n _NEW EDITION._\n\n LONDON:\n LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO.\n 1883.\n\n\n\n\n LONDON:\n\n R. CLAY, SONS, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS,\n\n BREAD STREET HILL.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nOwing to the conditions of time, language, country, and race under\nwhich the various books of the Holy Scriptures were written, it is\nimpossible that they should be rightly understood at the present day,\nand in this land, without the aid of many departments of knowledge.\nContemporary history, philology, geography, and ethnology must all be\npressed into the service of the true Biblical scholar; and there is\nyet another science which is to the full as important as either of the\nothers. This is Natural History, in its widest sense.\n\nThe Oriental character of the Scriptural books causes them to abound\nwith metaphors and symbols, taken from the common life of the time.\nThey embrace the barren precipitous rocks alternating with the green\nand fertile valleys, the trees, flowers, and herbage, the creeping\nthings of the earth, the fishes of the sea, the birds of the air, and\nthe beasts which abode with man or dwelt in the deserts and forests.\nUnless, therefore, we understand these writings as those understood\nthem for whom they were written, it is evident that we shall\nmisinterpret instead of rightly comprehending them. Even with secular\nbooks of equally ancient date, the right understanding of them would\nbe important, but in the case of the Holy Scriptures it is more than\nimportant, and becomes a duty. The field which is laid open to us is\nso large that only one department of Natural History, namely Zoology,\ncan be treated in this work, although it is illustrated by many\nreferences to other branches of Natural History, to the physical\ngeography of Palestine, Egypt, and Syria, the race-character of the\ninhabitants, and historical parallels. The importance of Zoology in\nelucidating the Scriptures cannot be overrated, and without its aid we\nshall not only miss the point of innumerable passages of the Old and\nNew Testament, but the words of our Lord Himself will either be\ntotally misinterpreted, or at least lose the greater part of their\nsignificance.\n\nThe object of the present work is therefore to take, in its proper\nsuccession, every creature whose name is given in the Scriptures, and\nto supply so much of its history as will enable the reader to\nunderstand all the passages in which it is mentioned. A general\naccount of each animal will be first given, followed by special\nexplanations (wherever required) of those texts in which pointed\nreference is made to it, but of which the full force cannot be\ngathered without a knowledge of Natural History.\n\nThe illustrations are all taken from the living animals, while the\naccessory details have been obtained either from the Egyptian or\nAssyrian monuments, from actual specimens, or from the photographs and\ndrawings of the latest travellers. They have been selected and\narranged so that each illustration explains one or more passages of\nScripture, and it is hoped that the work will possess equal interest\nfor the natural historian and the Biblical student.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\nMAMMALIA.\n\nTHE APE.\n\n The Monkey tribe rarely mentioned in Scripture--Why the Ape was\n introduced into Palestine--Solomon's ships, and their cargo of\n Apes, peacocks, ivory, and gold--Various species of Monkey that\n might have been imported--The Rhesus Monkey--The Hoonuman, or\n Entellus--Habits of the Monkey, and reverence in which it is\n held by the natives--The Egyptians and their Baboon\n worship--Idols and memorials--The Wanderoo--Its singular\n aspect--Reasons why it should be introduced into\n Palestine--General habits of the Wanderoo--Its love of\n curiosities--Probability that Solomon had a menagerie--Various\n species of Monkey that may be included in the term _Kophim_--The\n Satyr of Scripture--Babylon in its glory and fall--Fulfilment of\n prophecy--Judaic ideas of the Satyrs, or Seirim 1\n\nTHE BAT.\n\n The Bat mentioned always with abhorrence--Meaning of the Hebrew\n name--The prohibition against eating Bats--The edible species,\n their food and mode of life--The noisome character of the Bat,\n and the nature of its dwelling-place--Its hatred of\n light--Baruch and his prophecy--Appropriateness of the\n prophecy--Singular Mahommedan legend respecting the original\n creation of the Bat--The legend compared with the apocryphal\n gospels--The Bats of Palestine--Mr. Tristram's discoveries--Bats\n found in the quarries from which the stone of the Temple was\n hewn--Edible Bats in a cave near the centre of\n Palestine--Another species of long-tailed Bat captured in the\n rock caves where hermits had been buried--Other species which\n probably inhabit Palestine 11\n\nTHE LION.\n\n Frequent mention of the Lion in the Scriptures--Probability that\n it was once a common animal, though now extinct--Reasons for its\n disappearance--The Lion employed as an emblem in the\n Bible--Similarity of the African and Asiatic species--The chief\n characteristics of the Lion--Its strength, activity, and mode\n of seizing its prey--Various names of the Lion--Its courage when\n roused--Its roar, and peculiar mode of utterance--Invisibility\n of the Lion at dusk--The Lion lying in wait--The dwelling-place\n of the Lion--Its restlessness at night--Passages illustrative of\n these characteristics--Modes of capturing the Lion--The pitfall\n and the net--Lions kept as curiosities--The Lion-hunt as\n depicted on the buildings of ancient Nineveh 18\n\nTHE LEOPARD.\n\n The Leopard not often mentioned in the Scriptures--Its\n attributes exactly described--Probability that several animals\n were classed under the name--How the Leopard takes its\n prey--Craft of the Leopard--Its ravages among the flocks--The\n empire of man over the beast--The Leopard at bay--Localities\n wherein the Leopard lives--The skin of the Leopard--Various\n passages of Scripture explained 29\n\nTHE CAT.\n\n The Cat never mentioned by name in the canonical Scriptures, and\n only once in the Apocrypha--The Cat domesticated among the\n Egyptians, and trained in bird-catching--Neglected capabilities\n of the Cat--Anecdote of an English Cat that caught fish for her\n master--Presumed reason why the Scriptures are silent about the\n Cat--The Cat mentioned by Baruch 36\n\nTHE DOG.\n\n Antipathy displayed by Orientals towards the Dog, and manifested\n throughout the Scriptures--Contrast between European and\n Oriental Dogs--Habits of the Dogs of Palestine--The city Dogs\n and their singular organization--The herdsman's Dog--Various\n passages of Scripture--Dogs and the crumbs--Their\n numbers--Signor Pierotti's experience of the Dogs--Possibility\n of their perfect domestication--The peculiar humiliation of\n Lazarus--Voracity of the Wild Dogs--The fate of Ahab and\n Jezebel--Anecdote of a volunteer Watch-dog--Innate affection of\n the Dog towards mankind--Peculiar local instinct of the Oriental\n Dog--Albert Smith's account of the Dogs at Constantinople--The\n Dervish and his Dogs--The Greyhound--Uncertainty of the word 39\n\nTHE WOLF.\n\n Identity of the animal indisputable--Its numbers, past and\n present--The Wolf never mentioned directly--Its general\n habits--References in Scripture--Its mingled ferocity and\n cowardice--Its association into packs--The Wolf's bite--How it\n takes its prey--Its ravages among the flocks--Allusions to this\n habit--The shepherd and his nightly enemies--Mr. Tristram and\n the Wolf--A semi-tamed Wolf at Marsaba 50\n\nTHE FOX, OR JACKAL.\n\n The two animals comprehended under one name--The Jackal--Its\n numbers in ancient and modern Palestine--General habits of the\n Jackal--Localities where the Jackal is found--Samson, and the\n three hundred \"foxes\"--Popular objections to the narrative--The\n required number easily obtained--Signor Pierotti's remarks upon\n the Jackal--An unpleasant position--How the fields were set on\n fire--The dread of fire inherent in wild beasts--The truth of\n the narrative proved--The Fox and Jackal destructive among\n grapes--Allusions to the Fox in the New Testament--Partially\n tamed Foxes 55\n\nTHE HY\u00c6NA.\n\n The Hy\u00e6na not mentioned by name, but evidently alluded\n to--Signification of the word _Zabua_--Translated in the\n Septuagint as \"Hy\u00e6na\"--A scene described by the Prophet\n Isaiah--The Hy\u00e6na plentiful in Palestine at the present day--Its\n well-known cowardice and fear of man--The uses of the Hy\u00e6na, and\n the services which it renders--The particular species of\n Hy\u00e6na--The Hy\u00e6na in the burial-grounds--Hunting the\n Hy\u00e6na--Curious superstition respecting the talismanic properties\n of its skin--Precautions adopted in flaying it--Popular legends\n of the Hy\u00e6na and its magical powers--The cavern home of the\n Hy\u00e6na--The Valley of Zeboim 62\n\nTHE WEASEL.\n\n Difficulty of identifying the Weasel of Scripture--The Weasel of\n Palestine--Suggested identity with the Ichneumon 68\n\nTHE FERRET.\n\n Translation of the Hebrew word _Anakah_--The Shrew-mouse of\n Palestine--Etymology of the word--The Gecko or Fan-foot, its\n habits and peculiar cry--Repugnance felt by the Arabs of the\n present day towards the Gecko 69\n\nTHE BADGER.\n\n Difficulty of identifying the _Tachash_ of Scripture--References\n to \"badgers' skins\"--The Dugong thought to be the Badger--The\n Bedouin sandals--Nature of the materials for the\n Tabernacle--Habits of the Badger--The species found in\n Palestine--Uses of the Badgers' skins--Looseness of zoological\n terms 70\n\nTHE BEAR.\n\n The Syrian Bear--Identity of the Hebrew and Arabic titles--Its\n colour variable according to age--Bears once numerous in\n Palestine, and now only occasionally seen--Reason for their\n diminution--Present localities of the Bear, and its favourite\n haunts--Food of the Bear--Its general habits--Its ravages among\n the flocks--The Bear dangerous to mankind--The Bear robbed of\n her whelps--Illustrative passages--Its mode of fighting--Various\n references to the Bear, from the time of Samuel to that of St.\n John 75\n\nTHE HEDGEHOG, OR BITTERN.\n\n Various readings of the word _Kipp\u00f4d_--The Jewish Bible and its\n object--The Syrian Hedgehog and its appearance--Its fondness for\n dry spots--The prophecies of Isaiah and Zephaniah, and their\n bearing on the subject--The Porcupine supposed to be the\n Kipp\u00f4d--The Hedgehog and Porcupine called by the same name in\n Greek and Arabic--Habits of the Porcupine--Its quills, and the\n manner of their shedding 80\n\nTHE PORCUPINE.\n\n Presumed identity of the Kipp\u00f4d with the Porcupine--The same\n Greek name applied to the Porcupine and Hedgehog--Habits of the\n Porcupine--The common Porcupine found plentifully in Palestine\n 85\n\nTHE MOLE.\n\n The two Hebrew words which are translated as \"Mole\"--Obscurity\n of the former name--A parallel case in our own language--The\n second name--The Moles and the Bats, why associated\n together--The real Mole of Scripture, its different names, and\n its place in zoology--Description of the Mole-rat and its\n general habits--Curious superstition--Discovery of the species\n by Mr. Tristram--Scripture and science--How the Mole-rat finds\n its food--Distinction between the Mole and the present animal 86\n\nTHE MOUSE.\n\n Conjectures as to the right translation of the Hebrew word\n _Akbar_--Signification of the word--The Mice which marred the\n land--Miracles, and their economy of power--The Field-mouse--Its\n destructive habits and prolific nature--The insidious nature of\n its attacks, and its power of escaping observation--The Hamster,\n and its habits--Its custom of storing up provisions for the\n winter--Its fertility and unsociable nature--The Jerboa, its\n activity and destructiveness--Jerboas and Hamsters eaten by\n Arabs and Syrians--Various species of Dormice and Sand-rats 91\n\nTHE HARE.\n\n The prohibitions of the Mosaic law--The chewing of the cud and\n division of the hoof--Identity of the Hare of\n Scripture--Rumination described--The Hare a rodent and not a\n ruminant--Cowper and his Hares--Structure of the rodent\n tooth--The Mosaic law accommodated to its recipients--The Hares\n of Palestine and their habits 96\n\nCATTLE.\n\n The cattle of Palestine, and their decadence at the present\n day--Ox-flesh not used for food in modern times--Oxen of the\n stall, and oxen of the pasture--The use of the ox in\n agriculture--The yoke and its structure--The plough and the\n goad--The latter capable of being used as a weapon--Treading out\n the corn--The cart and its wheels--The ox used as a beast of\n burden--Cattle turned loose to graze--The bulls of\n Bashan--Curiosity of the ox tribe--A season of drought--Branding\n the cattle--An Egyptian field scene--Cattle-keeping an\n honourable post--The ox as used for sacrifice--Ox-worship--The\n bull Apis, and his history--Persistency of the\n bull-worship--Jeroboam's sin--Various names of cattle--The\n Indian buffalo 101\n\nTHE WILD BULL.\n\n The T\u00f4, Wild Bull of the Old Testament--Passages in which it is\n mentioned--The Wild Bull in the net--Hunting with nets in the\n East--The Oryx supposed to be the T\u00f4 of Scripture--Description\n of the Oryx, its locality, appearance, and habits--The points in\n which the Oryx agrees with the T\u00f4--The \"snare\" in which the foot\n is taken, as distinguished from the net 116\n\nTHE RE\u00caM, OR \"UNICORN\" OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The Re\u00eam evidently known to the Jews--Various theories\n concerning the Unicorn--Supposed identity with the Indian\n Rhinoceros--Passages of Scripture alluding to the strength,\n violent and intractable temper of the Re\u00eam--The Re\u00eam a\n two-horned animal--Its evident connexion with the Ox tribe--Its\n presumed identity with the now extinct Urus--Mr. Dawkins'\n treatise on the Urus--Enormous size and dangerous character of\n the Urus--Rabbinical legend of the Re\u00eam--Identity of the Urus\n with the modern varieties of cattle--The Bull-hunts of Nineveh\n 121\n\nTHE BISON.\n\n The Bison tribe and its distinguishing marks--Its former\n existence in Palestine--Its general habits--Origin of its\n name--Its musky odour--Size and speed of the Bison--Its\n dangerous character when brought to bay--Its defence against the\n Wolf--Its untameable disposition 131\n\nTHE GAZELLE, OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The Gazelle identified with the _Tsebi_, i.e. the Roe or Roebuck\n of Scripture--Various passages relating to the Tsebi--Its\n swiftness, its capabilities as a beast of chase, its beauty, and\n the quality of its flesh--The Tsebiyah rendered in Greek as\n Tabitha, and translated as Dorcas, or Gazelle--Different\n varieties of the Gazelle--How the Gazelle defends itself against\n wild beasts--Chase of the Gazelle--The net, the battue, and the\n pitfall--Coursing the Gazelle with greyhounds and falcons--Mr.\n Chasseaud's account of a hunting party--Gentleness of the\n Gazelle 133\n\nTHE PYGARG, OR ADDAX.\n\n The Dishon or Dyshon--Signification of the word\n _Pygarg_--Certainty that the Dishon is an antelope, and that it\n must be one of a few species--Former and present range of the\n Addax--Description of the Addax--The Strepsiceros of Pliny 141\n\nTHE FALLOW-DEER, OR BUBALE.\n\n The word _Jachmur_ evidently represents a species of\n antelope--Probability that the Jachmur is identical with the\n Bubale, or Bekk'r-el-Wash--Resemblance of the animal to the ox\n tribe--Its ox-like horns and mode of attack--Its capability of\n domestication--Former and present range of the Bubale--Its\n representation on the monuments of ancient Egypt--Delicacy of\n its flesh--Size and general appearance of the animal 143\n\nTHE SHEEP.\n\n Importance of Sheep in the Bible--The Sheep the chief wealth of\n the pastoral tribes--Tenure of land--Value of good\n pasture-land--Arab shepherds of the present day--Difference\n between the shepherds of Palestine and England--Wanderings of\n the flocks in search of food--Value of the wells--How the Sheep\n are watered--Duties of the shepherd--The shepherd a kind of\n irregular soldier--His use of the sling--Sheep following their\n shepherd--Calling the Sheep by name--The shepherd usually a part\n owner of the flocks--Structure of the sheepfolds--The rock\n caverns of Palestine--David's adventure with Saul--Penning of\n the Sheep by night--Use of the dogs--Sheep sometimes brought up\n by hand--How Sheep are fattened in the Lebanon district--The two\n breeds of Sheep in Palestine--The broad-tailed Sheep, and its\n peculiarities--Reference to this peculiarity in the Bible--The\n Talmudical writers, and their directions to sheep-owners 146\n\nTHE CHAMOIS.\n\n The Zemer or Chamois only once mentioned in the\n Bible--Signification of the word _Zemer_--Probability that the\n Zemer is the Aoudad--Appearance of the Aoudad--Its strength and\n activity--Fierce temper of the adult male--Horns of the\n Aoudad--Their probable use as musical instruments--Habits of the\n Aoudad--The Mouflon probably classed with the Aoudad under the\n name of Zemer--Appearance and habits of the Mouflon 185\n\nTHE GOAT.\n\n Value of the Goat--Its use in furnishing food--The male kid the\n usual animal of slaughter--Excellence of the flesh, and\n deception of Isaac--Milk of the Goat--An Oriental milking\n scene--The hair of the Goat, and the uses to which it is\n put--The Goat's skin used for leather--The \"bottle\" of\n Scripture--Mode of making and repairing the bottles--Ruse of the\n Gibeonites--The \"bottle in the smoke\"--The sacks and the\n kneading-troughs--The Goat as used for sacrifice--General habits\n of the Goat--Separation of the Goats from the sheep--Performing\n Goats--Different breeds of Goats in Palestine 189\n\nTHE WILD GOAT.\n\n The Azelim or Wild Goats of Scripture identical with the Beden\n or Arabian Ibex--Different names of the Beden--Its appearance\n and general habits--En-gedi, or Goats' Fountain--The Beden\n formerly very plentiful in Palestine, and now tolerably\n common--Its agility--Difficulty of catching or killing it--How\n the young are captured--Flesh of the Beden--Use of the horns at\n the present day--The Ako of Deuteronomy 203\n\nTHE DEER.\n\n The Hart and Hind of Scripture--Species of Deer existing in\n Palestine--Earliest mention of the Hind--The Hart classed among\n the clean animals--Passages alluding to its speed--Care of the\n mother for her young, and her custom of secreting it--Tameable\n character of the Deer--The Rabbinical writers and their\n theories--Shedding of the Deer's horns--Its fabled mode of\n sleeping--The gall in the tail--Curious traditions of the enmity\n between Deer and serpents--Virtues of a Deer-skin coat 208\n\nTHE CAMEL.\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n The two species of Camel, and the mode of distinguishing\n them--Value of the Camel in the East--Camels mentioned as\n elements of wealth--Uses of the Camel--The Jews forbidden to eat\n its flesh--The milk of the Camel--Thirst-enduring\n capability--The internal reservoir--The hump, and its uses to\n the animal--The Camel as a beast of draught and burden--How the\n Camel is laden--Knowledge of its own powers--Camels for\n riding--Difficulty of sitting a Camel--A rough-paced\n steed--Method of guiding the Camel--The mesh'ab, or Camel-stick\n of office--The women's saddle--Rachel's stratagem--Ornaments of\n the Camel--The swift dromedary, Heirie, or Deloul--Its ungainly\n aspect--Speed and endurance of the Deloul--The Camel-posts of\n Bornu--Camel-drivers and their conduct--The driver's song--Young\n Camels and their appearance--The deserted Camel 216\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n The Camel and its master--Occasional fury of the animal--A boy\n killed by a Camel--Another instance of an infuriated\n Camel--Theory respecting the Arab and his Camel--Apparent\n stupidity of the Camel--Its hatred of a load, and mode of\n expressing its disapprobation--Riding a Camel through the\n streets--A narrow escape--Ceremony of weaning a young Camel--The\n Camel's favourite food--Structure of the foot and adaptation to\n locality--Difficulty in provisioning--Camel's hair and\n skin--Sal-ammoniac and desert fuel--The Camel and the needle's\n eye--Straining at a gnat and swallowing a Camel 233\n\nTHE BACTRIAN CAMEL.\n\n General description of the animal--Its use in mountain\n roads--Peculiar formation of the foot--Uses of a mixed\n breed--Its power of enduring cold--Used chiefly as a beast of\n draught--Unfitness for the plough--The cart and mode of\n harnessing--The load which it can draw--Camel-skin ropes--A\n Rabbinical legend 244\n\nTHE HORSE.\n\n The Hebrew words which signify the Horse--The Horse introduced\n into Palestine from Egypt--Similarity of the war-horse of\n Scripture and the Arab horse of the present day--Characteristics\n of the Horse--Courage and endurance of the Horse--Hardness of\n its unshod hoofs--Love of the Arab for his Horse--Difficulty of\n purchasing the animal--The Horse prohibited to the\n Israelites--Solomon's disregard of the edict--The war-chariot,\n its form and use--Probable construction of the iron chariot--The\n cavalry Horse--Lack of personal interest in the animal 248\n\nTHE ASS.\n\n Importance of the Ass in the East--Its general use for the\n saddle--Riding the Ass not a mark of humility--The triumphal\n entry--White Asses--Character of the Scriptural Ass--Saddling\n the Ass--The Ass used in agriculture--The Ass's millstone--The\n water-wheel and the plough--Reminiscences of the Ass in the\n Scriptural narrative--Its value as property--The flesh of the\n Ass--The siege of Samaria and its horrors--Various legends\n respecting the Ass--The impostor and his fate--Samson and Balaam\n 264\n\nTHE WILD ASS.\n\n The Arod and Pere of Scripture--Various allusions to the Wild\n Ass--Its swiftness and wildness--The Wild Ass of Asia and\n Africa--Knowledge of the animal displayed by the sacred\n writers--How the Wild Ass is hunted--Excellence of its\n flesh--Sir R. K. Porter's meeting with a Wild Ass--Origin of the\n domestic Ass--The Wild Asses of Quito 279\n\nTHE MULE.\n\n Ancient use of the Mule--Various breeds of Mule--Supposed date\n of its introduction into Palestine--Mule-breeding forbidden to\n the Jews--The Mule as a saddle-animal--Its use on occasions of\n state--The king's Mule--Mules brought from Babylon after the\n captivity--Obstinacy of the Mule--The Mule as a beast of\n burden--The \"Mule's burden\" of earth--Mules imported by the\n Phoenicians--Legends respecting the Mule 285\n\nSWINE.\n\n The Mosaic prohibition of the pig--Hatred of Swine by Jews and\n Mahometans--A strange use of bacon--The prodigal son--Resistance\n to the prosecution of Antiochus--Swine hated by the early\n Egyptians--Supposed connexion between Swine and diseases of the\n skin--Destruction of the herd of Swine--The locality of the\n event discovered--Pigs bred for the monasteries--The jewel of\n gold in a Swine's snout--The wild boar of the woods, and the\n beast of the reeds--The damage which it does to the\n vines--General account of the wild boar of Palestine--Excellence\n of its flesh 292\n\nTHE ELEPHANT.\n\n The Elephant indirectly mentioned in the Authorized\n Version--Solomon's ivory throne--Ivory used in Egypt--Horns of\n ivory--The ivory palaces--Beds of ivory--The Tyrian ships--Ivory\n mentioned by Homer--Vessels of ivory--The Elephant as an engine\n of war--Antiochus and his Elephants--Oriental\n exaggeration--Self-devotion of Eleazar--Attacking the Elephants,\n and their gradual abandonment in war--The Talmudical writers on\n the Elephant--A funeral and an omen 302\n\nTHE CONEY, OR HYRAX.\n\n The Shaphan of Scripture, and the correct meaning of the\n word--Identification of the Shaphan with the Syrian\n Hyrax--Description of the animal--Its feet, teeth, and apparent\n rumination--Passages in which the Coney is mentioned--Habits of\n the animal--Its activity and wariness--The South African Hyrax,\n and its mode of life--Difficulty of procuring it--Similarity in\n appearance and habits of the Syrian species--Three species of\n Hyrax known to naturalists--The Talmudical writers on the\n Shaphan--The jerboa and the rabbit--A curious speculation and a\n judicious compromise 312\n\nBEHEMOTH.\n\n Literal translation of the word _Behemoth_--Various theories\n respecting the identity of the animal--The Hippopotamus known to\n the ancient Hebrews--Geographical range of the animal--\"He\n eateth grass like the ox\"--Ravages of the Hippopotamus among the\n crops--Structure of the mouth and teeth--The \"sword or scythe\"\n of the Hippopotamus--Some strange theories--Haunts of the\n Hippopotamus--The Egyptian hunter--A valuable painting--Strength\n of the Hippopotamus--Rising of the Nile--Modern\n hunters--Wariness of the Hippopotamus--The pitfall and the\n drop-trap 318\n\n\nBIRDS.\n\nTHE L\u00c4MMERGEIER, OR OSSIFRAGE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n Difficulty of identifying the various birds mentioned in\n Scripture--The Vultures of Palestine--The L\u00e4mmergeier, or\n Ossifrage of Scripture--The Hebrew word _Peres_, and its\n signification--The Ossifrage, or Bone-breaker--Appearance of the\n L\u00e4mmergeier--Its flight and mode of feeding--How the L\u00e4mmergeier\n kills snakes and tortoises, and breaks marrow-bones--Mode of\n destroying the chamois and mountain sheep--Nest of the\n L\u00e4mmergeier 333\n\nTHE EGYPTIAN VULTURE, OR GIER-EAGLE.\n\n The R\u00e2ch\u00e2m or Gier-Eagle identified with the Egyptian\n Vulture--Its appearance on the Egyptian monuments--Signification\n of the word _R\u00e2ch\u00e2m_--Various translations of the word--The\n shape, size, and colour of the bird--Its value as a scavenger,\n and its general habits--The Egyptian Vultures and the\n griffons--Its fondness for the society of man--Nest of the\n Egyptian Vulture 339\n\nTHE GRIFFON VULTURE, OR EAGLE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The Griffon Vulture identified with the Eagle of Scripture--The\n word _Nesher_ and its signification--Geographical range of the\n Griffon--Its mode of flight and sociable habits--The featherless\n head and neck of the bird--The Vulture used as an image of\n strength, swiftness, and rapacity--Its powers of sight--How\n Vultures assemble round a carcase--Nesting-places of the\n Griffon--Mr. Tristram's description of the Griffon--Rock caves\n of the Wady Ham\u00e2m--Care of the young, and teaching them to\n fly--Strength of the Griffon--Its emblematical use in Egypt and\n Assyria--The god Nisroch--Noble aspect of the Griffon--Its\n longevity--Various attitudes assumed by the bird 344\n\nTHE EAGLE.\n\n Signification of the word _Asniych_--The Golden Eagle and its\n habits--The Imperial Eagle--Its solitary mode of life--The\n Short-toed Eagle common in Palestine--Its zoological\n position--Food of the Short-toed Eagle--Its form and colour 354\n\nTHE OSPREY.\n\n The Osprey, or Fishing Eagle--Its geographical range--Mode of\n securing prey--Structure of its feet--Its power of balancing\n itself in the air 356\n\nTHE KITE, OR VULTURE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The word _Dayah_ and its signification--Dayah a collective term\n for different species of Kites--The Common or Red Kite plentiful\n in Palestine--Its piercing sight and habit of soaring--The Black\n Kite of Palestine and its habits--The Egyptian Kite--The Raah or\n Glede of Scripture--The Buzzards and their habits--The Peregrine\n Falcon an inhabitant of Central Palestine, and the Lanner of the\n eastern parts of the country 357\n\nTHE HAWK.\n\n The Netz or Hawk--Number of species probably grouped under that\n name--Rare occurrence of the word--The Sparrow-Hawk and its\n general habits--Its place of nesting--The Kestrel, or\n Wind-hover--Various names by which it is known in England--Its\n mode of feeding and curious flight--The Hariers--Probable\n derivation of the name--Species of Hariers known to inhabit\n Palestine--Falconry apparently unknown to the ancient Jews 364\n\nTHE OWL.\n\n The words which have been translated as \"Owl\"--The C\u00f4s, or\n Little Owl--Use made of the Little Owl in bird-catching--Habits\n of the bird--The Barn, Screech, or White Owl a native of\n Palestine--The Yansh\u00fbph, or Egyptian Eagle Owl--Its food and\n nest--The Lilith, or Night Monster--Various interpretations of\n the word--The Kippoz probably identical with the Scops Owl, or\n Marouf 37\n\nTHE NIGHT-HAWK.\n\n Different interpretations of the word _Tachm\u00e2s_--Probability\n that it signifies the Nightjar--Various names of the bird--Its\n remarkable jarring cry, and wheeling flight--Mode of\n feeding--Boldness of the bird--Deceptive appearance of its size\n 377\n\nTHE SWALLOW.\n\n Identification of the smaller birds--Oriental indifference to\n natural history--Use of collective terms--The\n Swallow--Signification of the word _Deror_--The Bird of\n Liberty--Swallows and Swifts--The Sunbirds and\n Bee-eaters--Variety of small birds found in Palestine--The\n Swallows of Palestine--Swallows protected by man in various\n countries--Nesting of the Swallow--The Rufous Swallow and\n Martin--The Sis or Swift--Various species of Swift inhabiting\n the Holy Land--Talmudical notions of the Swift or Swallow--The\n leper and his offering--The cooking pot and the sacrificial\n vessel--Signification of the word _Tzippor-deror_ 381\n\nTHE HOOPOE, OR LAPWING OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The Dukiphath of Scripture--Various interpretations of the\n word--The Hoopoe--Its beauty and ill reputation--The unpleasant\n odour of its nest--Food of the Hoopoe--Its beautiful nest, and\n remarkable gestures--A curious legend of Solomon and the Hoopoe\n 392\n\nTHE SPARROW.\n\n Signification of the word _Tzippor_--The bird used for the\n leper's sacrifice--The Sparrow upon the house-top--Architecture\n of the East--Proclamation from the house-tops--The Blue Thrush,\n its appearance and habits--Little birds exposed for sale in the\n market--The two Sparrows sold for a farthing--Bird-catching--The\n net, the snare, and the trap--The Sparrow that builds her nest\n in the Temple--The Tree Sparrow--Various Sparrows that inhabit\n Palestine--Birds kept in cages 395\n\nTHE CUCKOO.\n\n The Cuckoo only twice mentioned in Scripture--Difficulty of\n identifying the Shachaph--The common species, and the Great\n Spotted Cuckoo--Depositing the egg--Conjectures respecting the\n Shachaph--Etymology of the word--The various gulls, and other\n sea-birds 405\n\nTHE DOVE.\n\n Parallel between the lamb and the Dove--Derivation of the Hebrew\n word _Yon\u00e2h_--The Dove and the olive branch--Abram's sacrifice,\n and its acceptance--The sacrifice according to the law of\n Moses--The Dove-sellers of the Temple--Talmudical zoology--The\n story of Ilisch--The Dove and the raven--The Dove a type of\n Israel--The Beni-yon\u00e2h, or Sons of Pigeons--Home-finding\n instinct of the pigeon--The Oriental Dove-cotes--Voice of the\n Dove--Its strength of wing--The Dove's dung of Samaria--Various\n pigeons of Palestine--The Rock Dove and its multitudes--The Dove\n and the Griffon--The Turtle Doves of Palestine, and their\n appearance and habits 408\n\nPOULTRY.\n\n Poultry plentiful in Palestine at the present day--The Domestic\n Fowl unknown in the early times of Israel--The eating and\n gathering of eggs--References to Poultry in the New\n Testament--The egg and the scorpion--The fatted fowl of\n Solomon--The hen brooding over her eggs--Poultry prohibited\n within Jerusalem--The cock-crowing 421\n\nTHE PEACOCK.\n\n The foreign curiosities imported by Solomon--The word _Tucciyim_\n and its various interpretations--Identity of the word with the\n Cingalese name of the Peacock--Reasons why the Peacock should\n have been brought to Solomon--Its subsequent neglect and\n extirpation 425\n\nTHE PARTRIDGE.\n\n The word _Kore_ and its signification--The Partridge upon the\n mountains--David's simile--The Desert Partridge and its\n habits--Hunting the Partridge with sticks--Eggs of the\n Partridge--A disputed reading, and probable signification of the\n passage--Egg-hunting in Palestine--The various species of\n Partridge--The Francolin and the Sand-grouse 426\n\nTHE QUAIL.\n\n Signification of the word _Sel\u00e2v_--Various passages in which the\n word is mentioned--The locust, the stork, and the\n sand-grouse--Spreading the birds around the camp--Migration of\n the Quail--Drying the Quails for food--Modes of catching the\n Quail in the East--The Quail-hunters of Northern\n Africa--Quarrelsome nature of the bird--Quail-fighting in the\n East--How the Quails were brought to the Israelites 430\n\nTHE RAVEN.\n\n Signification of the word _Oreb_--The Haven tribe plentiful in\n Palestine--The Raven and the dove--Elijah and the\n Ravens--Various explanations of the circumstance--Feeding the\n young Ravens--Luis of Grenada's sermon--The white Raven of\n ancient times--An old legend--Reference to the blackness of the\n Raven's plumage--Desert-loving habits of the Raven--Its mode of\n attacking the eye--Notions of the old commentators--Ceremonial\n use of the Raven--Return of the Ravens--Cunning of the\n bird--Nesting-places of the Raven--The magpie and its\n character--The starling--Its introduction into Palestine--The\n Rabbi perplexed--Solution of the difficulty 439\n\nTHE OSTRICH.\n\n Hebrew words designating the Ostrich--Description of the bird in\n the Book of Job--Ancient use of Ostrich plumes--Supposed\n heedlessness of eggs and young--Mode of depositing the\n eggs--Hatching them in the sand--Natural enemies of the\n Ostrich--Anecdote of Ostriches and their young--Alleged\n stupidity of the Ostrich--Methods of hunting and snaring the\n bird--The Ostrich in domestication--Speed of the Ostrich--The\n flesh of the bird prohibited to the Jews--Ostrich eggs and their\n uses--Food of the Ostrich--Mode of drinking--Cry of the Ostrich,\n and reference made to it in Micah 450\n\nTHE BITTERN.\n\n Signification of the word _Kippod_--The Bittern and its general\n appearance--The bird of solitude--Difficulty of detecting the\n Bittern in its haunts--Mudie's description of the Bittern and\n its home--The strange cry of the bird--Superstitions connected\n with it--The Night-raven--Nest of the Bittern--Scarcity of the\n bird at the present day--Food of the Bittern--The bird formerly\n brought to table 462\n\nTHE HERON.\n\n The Heron mentioned as an unclean bird--The Heron used for food\n in England, and considered as a delicacy--Sociable character of\n the bird, and its mode of feeding--Its enormous appetite--How\n the Heron fights--Ancient falconry--Nesting of the Heron--The\n papyrus marshes and their dangers--Description of the\n papyrus--Vessels of bulrushes--The Egret and its beautiful\n plumage--Uses of the train feathers 468\n\nTHE CRANE.\n\n Various passages in which the Crane is mentioned--Its migratory\n habits and loud voice--Geographical range of the Crane--The bird\n once plentiful in the fen districts of England--Its favourite\n roosting-places--Size of the Crane, and measurement of the\n wings--The Crane once used as food--Plumes of the Crane and\n their use--Structure of the vocal organs--Nest and eggs of the\n Crane. 474\n\nTHE STORK.\n\n Signification of the Hebrew word _Chasidah_--Various passages in\n which it is mentioned--The Chasidah therefore a large,\n wide-winged, migratory bird--Its identification with the\n Stork--Derivation of its Hebrew name--The Stork always\n protected--Uses of the tail--Its mode of quartering the ground\n in search of food--Migratory habits of the Stork--Nesting of the\n bird, and its favourite localities--The fir-trees of\n Palestine--Love of the Stork for its young 478\n\nTHE SWAN.\n\n Signification of the word _Tinshemeth_--The Gallinule and the\n Ibis--Appearance and habits of the Hyacinthine Gallinule--A\n strange use for the bird--The White or Sacred Ibis--The bird\n mentioned by Herodotus--The Glossy Ibis, or Black\n Ibis--Veneration with which the bird was regarded 485\n\nTHE CORMORANT.\n\n The word _Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k_ and its signification--The Greek\n Catarrhactes--Habits of the Cormorant--The bird trained to catch\n fish--Mode of securing its prey--Nests and eggs of the\n Cormorant--Nesting in fir-trees--Flesh of the bird 490\n\nTHE PELICAN.\n\n The Pelican of the wilderness--Attitudes of the bird--Its love\n of solitude--Derivation of the Hebrew word--Fantastic\n interpretation--Mode of feeding the young--Fables regarding the\n Pelican--Breeding-places of the bird--The object of its wide\n wings and large pouch--Colour of the Pelican 495\n\n\nREPTILES.\n\nTHE TORTOISE.\n\n Reptiles in general--Looseness of the term \"creeping\n things\"--The Tzab of the Scriptures, translated as\n Tortoise--Flesh and eggs of the Tortoise--Its slow\n movements--Hibernation dependent on temperature--The\n Water-Tortoises--Their food and voracity--Their eggs--Their\n odour terrifying the horses--The Dhubb lizard and its\n legends--Its armed tail, and the use made of it--Its food, and\n localities which it prefers 505\n\nTHE LEVIATHAN, OR CROCODILE.\n\n Signification of the word _Leviathan_--Description in the Book\n of Job--Structure and general habits of the Crocodile--The\n throat-valve and its use--Position of the nostrils--Worship of\n the Crocodile--The reptile known in the Holy Land--Two legends\n respecting its presence there--Mode of taking prey--Cunning of\n the Crocodile--The baboons and the Crocodile--Speed of the\n reptile--Eggs and young of the Crocodile, and their\n enemies--Curious story of the ichneumon and ibis--Modes of\n capturing the Crocodile--Analysis of Job's description--The\n Crocodile also signified by the word _Tannin_. Aaron's rod\n changed into a Tannin--Various passages in which the word\n occurs--Use of the word by the Prophet Jeremiah 514\n\nTHE LET\u00c2\u00c2H OR LIZARD.\n\n Difficulty of identifying the Let\u00e2\u00e2h--Probability that it is a\n collective and not a specific term--Various Lizards of\n Palestine--The Green or Jersey Lizard--The Cyprius, its\n appearance and habits--The Glass Snake or\n Scheltopusic--Translation of the word _Chomet_--Probability that\n it signifies the Skink--Medicinal uses of the Lizard--The Seps\n tribe--The common Cicigna, and the popular belief concerning its\n habits--The Sph\u00e6nops and its shallow tunnel 529\n\nTHE CHAMELEON, MONITOR, AND GECKO.\n\n Translation of the word _Koach_--Signification of the word, and\n its applicability to the Chameleon--Power of the reptile's\n grasp--The prehensile tail--Demeanour of the Chameleon on the\n ground--The independent eyes--Its frequent change of\n colour--Mode of taking prey--Strange notions respecting the\n Chameleon--The Monitor, or Land Crocodile--Its habits and use to\n mankind--The Nilotic Monitor, and its habit of destroying the\n eggs and young of the Crocodile--The Gecko or Ferret of\n Scripture 534\n\nSERPENTS.\n\n Serpents in general--Signification of the Hebrew word\n _Nachash_--Various passages in which the Nachash is\n mentioned--The fiery Serpents of the wilderness--Explanation of\n the words \"flying\" and \"fiery\" as applied to Serpents--Haunts of\n the Serpent--The Cobra, or Asp of Scripture--Meaning of the word\n _Pethen_--The deaf Adder that stoppeth her ear--Serpent-charming\n in the East--Principle on which the charmers work--Sluggishness\n of the Serpent nature--Ceremony of initiation into\n Serpent-charming--Theories respecting the deaf Adder--Luis of\n Grenada's sermon--The Cerastes, or Horned Serpent--Appearance\n and habits of the reptile--The \"Adder in the path\" 540\n\nTHE VIPER, OR EPHEH.\n\n Passages in which the word _Epheh_ occurs--El-effah--The Sand\n Viper, or Toxicon--Its appearance and habits--The\n Acshub--Adder's poison--The Spuugh-Slange--The Cockatrice, or\n Tsepha--The Yellow Viper--Ancient ideas concerning the\n Cockatrice--Power of its venom 552\n\nTHE FROG.\n\n The Frog only mentioned in the Old Testament as connected with\n the plagues of Egypt--The severity of this plague explained--The\n Frog detestable to the Egyptians--The Edible Frog and its\n numbers--Description of the Species. 557\n\n\nFISHES.\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n Impossibility of distinguishing the different species of\n fishes--The fishermen Apostles--Fish used for food--The miracle\n of the loaves and Fishes--The Fish broiled on the coals--Clean\n and unclean Fishes--The scientific writings of Solomon--The\n Sheat-fish, or Silurus--The Eel and the Mur\u00e6na--The Long-headed\n Barbel--Fish-ponds and preserves--The Fish-ponds of Heshbon--The\n Sucking-fish--The Lump-sucker--The Tunny--The Coryphene 563\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n Various modes of capturing Fish--The hook and line--Military use\n of the hook--Putting a hook in the jaws--The fishing\n spear--Different kinds of net--The casting-net--Prevalence of\n this form--Technical words among fishermen--Fishing by\n night--The draught of Fishes--The real force of the\n miracle--Selecting the Fish--The Fish-gate and Fish-market--Fish\n killed by a draught--Fishing in the Dead Sea--Dagon, the\n fish-god of Philistina, Assyria, and Siam--Various Fishes of\n Egypt and Palestine 571\n\n\nINVERTEBRATES.\n\nMOLLUSCS.\n\n The purple of Scripture--Various Molluscs from which it is\n obtained--The common Dog whelk of England--The sac containing\n the purple dye--Curious change of colour--Mode of obtaining the\n dye--The Tyrian purple--The king of the Ethiopians and the\n purple robe--The professional purple dyers--Various words\n expressive of different shades of purple--Care taken to keep the\n preparation of the dye secret 586\n\nTHE SNAIL.\n\n The Snail which melteth--Rendering of the Jewish Bible--Theory\n respecting the track of the Snail--The Hebrew word\n _Shablul_--Various Snails of Palestine 589\n\nTHE ONYCHA.\n\n Ingredients of the sacred incense--The Onyx, or\n Onycha--Derivation of the word--The Arabic Dofr--The Doofu of\n Abyssinia--Odour of the perfume 590\n\nTHE PEARL.\n\n The Pearl of Scripture--Wisdom compared to Pearl--Different\n renderings of the Hebrew word--Opinions of the\n Talmudists--Structure of Pearls--The Pearls of the marine and\n aquatic mussels--Pearl-fisheries of the Conway--Metaphorical\n uses of the Pearl--The Pearl of great price--Casting Pearls\n before swine--An ancient proverb 592\n\nINSECTS.\n\n Insects--Beetles not mentioned in Scripture--The Locust--Various\n species of the insect, and different words used to signify\n it--The Arbeh of Scripture, and its derivation--The two\n migratory Locusts at rest and on the wing--The Locust\n swarms--Gordon Cumming's account--Progress of the insect\n hosts--Vain attempts to check them--Tossed up and down as a\n Locust--Effect of the winds on the insect--The east and the west\n winds--Locusts used for food--Ancient and modern travellers--The\n food of St. John 596\n\nTHE BEE.\n\n The Hebrew word _Deb\u00f4rah_-The Honey Bee of Palestine--Abundance\n of Bees in the Holy Land--Habitations of the wild Bee--Hissing\n for the Bee--Bees in dead carcases--The honey of\n Scripture--Domesticated Bees and their hives--Stores of wild\n honey--The story of Jonathan--The Crusaders and the\n honey--Butter and honey--Oriental sweetmeats--The Dibs, or\n grape-honey, and mode of preparation--Wax, its use as a metaphor\n 605\n\nTHE HORNET.\n\n The Tzirah or Hornet of Scripture--Travellers driven away by\n Hornets--The Hornet used as a metaphor--Oriental symbolism--The\n Talmudical writers--Sting of the Hornet 613\n\nTHE ANT.\n\n The Ant of Scripture--Solomon's allusion to the Ant--Habit of\n laying up stores of food--A controversy respecting the Ant--The\n Ants of Palestine, and their habits--The Agricultural or\n Mound-making Ant--Preparing ground, sowing, tending, reaping,\n and storing the crop--Different habits of Ants--Development of\n the insect--The winged Ants--An Arab proverb 616\n\nTHE CRIMSON WORM.\n\n The scarlet or crimson of Scripture--Signification of the word\n _Tol\u00e2\u00e2th_--The Coccus or Cochineal of Palestine compared with\n that of Mexico--Difference between the sexes--Mode of preparing\n the insect--The Arabic word _Kermes_ 622\n\nTHE CLOTHES MOTH.\n\n The Moth of Scripture evidently the Clothes Moth--The S\u00e2s and\n the 'Ash--Similitude between the Hebrew _s\u00e2s_ and the Greek\n _s\u00eas_--Moths and garments--Accumulation of clothes in the\n East--Various uses of the hoarded robes--The Moths, the rust,\n and the thief 624\n\nTHE SILKWORM MOTH.\n\n Various passages wherein Silk is mentioned--The virtuous woman\n and her household--Probability that the Hebrews were acquainted\n with Silk--Present cultivation of the Silkworm--The Silk-farms\n of the Lebanon--Signification of the word _Meshi_--Silkworms and\n thunder--Luis of Grenada's sermon--The Hebrew word _G\u00e2zam_, and\n its signification--The Palmer-worm of Scripture 627\n\nFLIES.\n\n Flies of Scripture--Dead Flies and the apothecary's\n ointment--Gadflies and their attacks--Annoyance caused by the\n House-fly--Flies and ophthalmia--Signor Pierotti's account of\n the Flies--The sovereign remedy against Flies--Causes of their\n prevalence 632\n\nGNATS.\n\n The Gnat of Scripture--Straining out the Gnat and swallowing the\n camel, a typographical error--Probable identity of the Gnat and\n the mosquito 635\n\nTHE LOUSE.\n\n Insect parasites--The plague of Lice--Its effect on the\n magicians or priests--The Hebrew word _Chinnim_--Probability\n that it may be represented by \"tick\"--Habits of the ticks, their\n dwellings in dust, and their effects on man and beast 636\n\nTHE FLEA.\n\n Prevalence of the Flea in the East, and the annoyance caused by\n them to travellers--Fleas of the Lebanon--The Bey's\n bedfellows--The Pasha at the bath--Use of the word in Scripture\n 638\n\nTHE SCORPION.\n\n The Scorpions of Palestine--Signification of the word\n _Akrabbim_--Habits of the Scorpion--Dangers of mud walls--Venom\n of the Scorpion--Scorpions at sea--The Scorpion whip, and its\n use--The Scorpion Pass 640\n\nTHE SPIDER.\n\n Signification of the word _Semamith_--Various interpretations of\n a Scriptural passage--Talmudical opinions respecting the\n creature--The 'Akkabish and its web--Spiders of Palestine 643\n\nTHE WORM.\n\n Various words translated as \"Worm\"--Probable confusion of the\n words--The Rimmah and the Tole'ah--The Worm which destroyed\n Jonah's gourd--The Earthworm 644\n\nTHE HORSE LEECH.\n\n Signification of the word _Alukah_--The Arabic word--Leeches in\n Palestine--The horse and the Leech--Leeches in England 646\n\nSPONGE AND CORAL.\n\n Use of the Sponge in Scripture--Probability that the ancient\n Jews were acquainted with it--Sponges of the Mediterranean--The\n Coral, and its value--Signification of the word _Ramoth_ 647\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n\nFULL-PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n PAGE\n\n THE OSTRICH AND ITS HUNTERS. (Job xxxix. 19) _Frontispiece._\n\n THE LION AND HIS DEN. (Ezek. xix. 2) _to face_ 26\n\n DOGS PROWLING AT NIGHT. (Psa. lix. 14) \" 48\n\n THE BADGER AND ITS HOME. (Exod. xxvi. 14) \" 72\n\n BEARS DESCENDING FROM THE HILLS.\n (Prov. xxviii. 15) \" 76\n\n OXEN BEARING THE YOKE. (Lam. iii. 27) \" 104\n\n SHEEP AND THEIR SHEPHERD AND FOLD.\n (Psa. xxiii. 2) \" 156\n\n GOATS WOUNDED BY LION. (Amos iii. 12) \" 202\n\n THE HIND AND HER YOUNG. (Job xxxix. 1) \" 212\n\n CAMELS AND THEIR BURDENS. (Isa. xxx. 6) \" 222\n\n THE WAR HORSE GOING TO BATTLE. (Job xxxix. 25) \" 250\n\n WILD ASSES AND THE HUNTERS. (Job xxxix. 5-8) \" 282\n\n THE WILD BOAR IN THE VINEYARD. (Psa. lxxx. 13) \" 300\n\n ELEPHANTS IN A FOREST. (Ezek. xxvii. 15) \" 312\n\n THE HIPPOPOTAMUS OR BEHEMOTH. (Job xl. 21) \" 324\n\n VULTURES AND THEIR PREY. (Matt. xxiv. 28) \" 352\n\n THE EAGLE AND ITS NEST. (Job xxxix. 27) \" 354\n\n THE OSPREY AND ITS HAUNTS. (Deut. xiv. 12) \" 356\n\n THE OWL AMONG RUINS. (Job xxx. 29) \" 376\n\n PEACOCKS. (1 Kings x. 22) \" 426\n\n THE BITTERN AND ITS HOME. (Isa. xiv. 23) \" 466\n\n THE STORK IN THE FIR-TREES. (Psa. civ. 17) \" 482\n\n THE CROCODILE OR LEVIATHAN. (Job xli. 7) \" 520\n\n LOCUSTS ON THE MARCH. (Exod. x. 5) \" 600\n\n\nILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT.\n\n PAGE\n\n THE RHESUS AND ENTELLUS. (1 Kings x. 22) 3\n\n THE WANDEROO 6\n\n BATS IN THEIR CAVE. (Levit. xi. 19) 17\n\n THE LEOPARD BY THE WAY. (Hos. xiii. 7) 30\n\n THE WOLF AMONG THE SHEEP. (John x. 12) 51\n\n JACKALS AND THE SCAPEGOAT. (Psa. lxiii. 10) 56\n\n HY\u00c6NAS AND VULTURES. (Ezek. xxix. 5) 65\n\n THE HEDGEHOG. (Isa. xxxiv. 11) 81\n\n THE MOLE-RAT. (Levit. xi. 30) 87\n\n FIELD-MICE AMONG CORN. (1 Sam. vi. 5) 93\n\n SYRIAN HARES. (Deut. xiv. 7) 97\n\n OXEN TREADING OUT CORN. (Deut. xxv. 4) 107\n\n THE BUFFALO. (Amos vi. 12) 114\n\n THE WILD BULL, OR ORYX. (Isa. li. 21) 119\n\n THE UNICORN, OR BISON. (Job xxxix. 9) 132\n\n GAZELLES UPON THE MOUNTAINS. (Cant. ii. 8) 136\n\n THE PYGARG, OR ADDAX. (Deut. xiv. 4) 142\n\n THE FALLOW-DEER, OR BUBALE. (1 Kings iv. 23) 145\n\n SHEEP LED TO PASTURE. (John x. 3) 154\n\n THE RAM'S HORN TRUMPET. (Josh. vi. 4) 175\n\n THE PLACE OF SACRIFICE ON MOUNT GERIZIM 181\n\n THE CHAMOIS, OR AOUDAD. (Deut. xiv. 4, 5) 187\n\n GOATS DIVIDED FROM SHEEP. (Matt. xxv. 52) 199\n\n THE WILD GOAT, OR IBEX. (Psa. cxiv. 18) 206\n\n THE HIND, OR FALLOW-DEER. (Cant. ii. 7) 209\n\n THE DROMEDARY AND ITS RIDER. (Jer. ii. 23) 231\n\n THE CAMEL AND THE \"NEEDLE'S EYE.\" (Matt. xix. 24) 243\n\n BACTRIAN CAMELS HARNESSED. (Isa. xxi. 7) 246\n\n THE WAR CHARIOT OF EGYPT. (Jer. xlvi. 9) 261\n\n THE STATE CHARIOT OF ASSYRIA. (Jer. xvii. 25) 262\n\n SYRIAN ASSES. (Prov. xxvi. 3) 269\n\n MULES AND THEIR DRIVER. (Psa. xxxii. 9) 287\n\n CONIES AMONG THE ROCKS. (Prov. xxx. 26) 313\n\n THE HIPPOPOTAMUS IN THE RIVER. (Job xl. 21) 325\n\n THE HIPPOPOTAMUS AND TRAP. (Job xl. 24) 328\n\n THE OSSIFRAGE, OR L\u00c4MMERGEIER. (Deut. xiv. 12) 334\n\n THE GIER-EAGLE, OR EGYPTIAN VULTURE. (Deut. xiv. 17) 340\n\n THE VULTURE, OR KITE. (JOB xxviii. 7) 358\n\n THE GLEDE, OR PEREGRINE FALCON. (Deut. xiv. 13) 361\n\n THE LANNER FALCON 363\n\n THE HAWK, OR KESTREL. (Job xxxix. 26) 366\n\n THE LITTLE OWL. (Psa. cii. 6) 372\n\n THE NIGHT-HAWK. (Deut. xiv. 15) 378\n\n THE SWALLOW AND SWIFT. (Jer. viii. 7) 385\n\n THE LAPWING, OR HOOPOE. (Levit. xi. 19) 393\n\n THE SPARROW, OR BLUE THRUSH. (Psa. cii. 7) 399\n\n THE SPARROW, OR TREE SPARROW. (Psa. lxxxiv. 3) 403\n\n THE CUCKOO. (Levit. xi. 16) 406\n\n THE ROCK DOVE. (Cant. ii. 14) 416\n\n THE TURTLE DOVE. (Cant. ii. 12) 420\n\n POULTRY. (Luke xiii. 34) 423\n\n THE PARTRIDGE ON THE MOUNTAINS. (1 Sam. xxvi. 20) 428\n\n THE QUAIL. (Psa. cv. 40) 431\n\n THE RAVEN. (Job xxxviii. 41) 441\n\n THE OSTRICH AND ITS EGGS. (Job xxxix. 14) 454\n\n THE BITTERN. (Isa. xiv. 23) 463\n\n THE HERON. (Deut. xi. 19) 469\n\n THE CRANE. (Isa. xxxviii. 14) 475\n\n THE SWAN OR IBIS, OR GALLINULE. (Deut. xiv. 16) 486\n\n THE PELICAN OF THE WILDERNESS. (Psa. cii. 6) 496\n\n THE TORTOISE AND DHUBB. (Levit. xi. 29) 507\n\n THE LIZARD, OR CYPRIUS. (Levit. xi. 30) 530\n\n THE CHAMELEON AND THE GECKO. (Levit. xi. 30) 535\n\n THE ASP AND THE ADDER, OR THE COBRA AND THE CERASTES.\n (Psa. lviii. 4; Gen. xlix. 17) 542\n\n THE VIPER, OR TOXICOA. (Job xx. 16) 553\n\n THE FROG. (Exod. viii. 3) 558\n\n FISHES--MUR\u00c6NA, BARBEL, AND SHEAT-FISH. (Levit. xi. 10) 566\n\n FISHES--SUCKING-FISH, TUNNY, AND CORYPHENE. (Levit. x. 9) 569\n\n FISHES--LATES, MULLUS, AND URANOSCOPUS. (Numb. xi. 5) 582\n\n THE PEARL OYSTER. (Matt. xiii. 45) 594\n\n THE BEE. (Isa. vii 19) 606\n\n THE HORNET. (Exod. xxiii. 28) 614\n\n THE ANT. (Prov. vi. 6) 621\n\n THE CRIMSON WORM, OR COCHINEAL. (Isa. i. 18) 623\n\n BUTTERFLIES AND CATERPILLARS OF PALESTINE. (Joel i. 4) 631\n\n FLIES. (Isa. vii. 18) 635\n\n THE SCORPION. (Rev. ix. 10) 641\n\n THE CORAL. (Job xxviii. 18) 648\n\n\n\n\nMAMMALIA.\n\n\nBIBLE ANIMALS.\n\n\n\n\nTHE APE.\n\n The Monkey tribe rarely mentioned in Scripture--Why the Ape was\n introduced into Palestine--Solomon's ships, and their cargo of\n Apes, peacocks, ivory and gold--Various species of Monkey that\n might have been imported--The Rhesus Monkey--The Hoonuman or\n Entellus--Habits of the Monkey, and reverence in which it is\n held by the natives--The Egyptians and their Baboon\n worship--Idols and memorials--The Wanderoo--its singular\n aspect--Reasons why it should be introduced into\n Palestine--General habits of the Wanderoo--its love of\n curiosities--Probability that Solomon had a menagerie--Various\n species of Monkey that maybe included in the term \"Kophim\"--The\n Satyr of Scripture--Babylon in its glory and fall--Fulfilment of\n prophecy--Judaic ideas of the Satyrs, or Seirim.\n\n\nAnimals belonging to the monkey tribe are but sparingly mentioned in\nHoly Writ. If, as is possible, the Satyr of Scripture signifies some\nspecies of baboon, there are but three passages either in the Old or\nNew Testament where these animals are mentioned. In 1 Kings x. 22, and\nthe parallel passage 2 Chron. ix. 21, the sacred historian makes a\npassing allusion to apes as forming part of the valuable cargoes which\nwere brought by Solomon's fleet to Tharshish, the remaining articles\nbeing gold, ivory, and peacocks. The remaining passage occurs in Is.\nxiii. 21, where the prophet foretells that on the site of Babylon\nsatyrs shall dance.\n\nThe reason for this reticence is simple enough. No monkey was\nindigenous to Palestine when the various writers of the Bible lived,\nand all their knowledge of such animals must have been derived either\nfrom the description of sailors, or from the sight of the few\nspecimens that were brought as curiosities from foreign lands. Such\nspecimens must have been extremely rare, or they would not have been\nmentioned as adjuncts to the wealth of Solomon, the wealthiest, as\nwell as the wisest monarch of his time. To the mass of the people they\nmust have been practically unknown, and therefore hold but a very\ninferior place in the Scriptures, which were addressed to all mankind.\n\nThere is scarcely any familiar animal, bird, reptile or insect, which\nis not used in some metaphorical sense in the imagery which pervades\nthe whole of the Scriptures. For example, the various carnivorous\nanimals, such as the lion, wolf, and bear, are used as emblems of\ndestruction in various ways; while the carnivorous birds, such as the\neagle and hawk, and the destructive insects, such as the locust and\nthe caterpillar, are all similarly employed in strengthening and\nillustrating the words of Holy Writ.\n\nBut we never find any animal of the monkey tribe mentioned\nmetaphorically, possibly because any monkeys that were imported into\nPalestine must only have been intended as objects of curiosity, just\nas the peacocks which accompanied them were objects of beauty, and the\ngold and ivory objects of value--all being employed in the decoration\nof the king's palace.\n\nThe question that now comes before us is the species of monkey that is\nsignified by the Hebrew word Kophim. In modern days, we distinguish\nthis tribe of animals into three great sections, namely, the apes, the\nbaboons, and the monkey; and according to this arrangement the ape,\nbeing without tails, must have been either the chimpanzee of Africa,\nthe orang-outan of Sumatra, or one of the Gibbons. But there is no\nreason to imagine that the word Kophim was intended to represent any\none of these animals, and it seems evident that the word was applied\nto any species of monkey, whether it had a tail or not.\n\nPerhaps the best method of ascertaining approximately the particular\nspecies of monkey, is to notice the land from which the animals came.\nAccordingly, we find that the ships of Solomon brought gold, ivory,\napes, and peacocks, and that they evidently brought their cargoes from\nthe same country. Consequently, the country in question must produce\ngold, and must be inhabited by the monkey tribe, by the elephant, and\nby the peacock. If the peacock had not been thus casually mentioned,\nwe should have been at a loss to identify the particular country to\nwhich reference is made; but the mention of that bird shows that some\npart of Asia must be signified. It is most probable that the vessels\nin question visited both India and Ceylon, although, owing to the very\nimperfect geographical knowledge of the period, it is not possible to\nassert absolutely that this is the case. In India, however, and the\nlarge island of Ceylon, gold, elephants, peacocks, and monkeys exist;\nand therefore we will endeavour to identify the animals which are\nmentioned under the general term Apes, or Kophim.\n\n [Illustration: THE RHESUS AND ENTELLUS.\n\n \"_Bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes._\"--1 KINGS x. 22.]\n\nWe are quite safe in suggesting that some of the apes in question must\nhave belonged to the Macaques, and it is most likely that one of them\nwas the RHESUS, or BHUNDER, scientifically named _Macacus Rhesus_.\n\nThis animal is very plentiful in India, and is one of the many\ncreatures which are held sacred by the natives. Consequently, it takes\nup its quarters near human habitations, feeling sure that it will not\nbe injured, and knowing that plenty of food is at hand. It is said\nthat in some parts of India the natives always leave one-tenth of\ntheir grain-crops for the monkeys, and thus the animals content\nthemselves with this offering, and refrain from devastating the\nfields, as they would otherwise do. This story may be true or not. It\nis certainly possible that in a long series of years the monkeys of\nthat neighbourhood have come to look upon their tithe as a matter\nbelonging to the ordinary course of things; but whether it be true or\nnot, it illustrates the reverence entertained by the Hindoos for their\nmonkeys.\n\nIn many places where grain and fruit crops are cultivated, the monkeys\nget rather more than their share, plundering without scruple, and\nfinding no hindrance from the rightful owners, who dare not drive them\naway, lest they should injure any of these sacred beings. However,\nbeing unmindful of the maxim, \"qui facit per alium, facit per se,\"\nthey are only too glad to avail themselves of the assistance of\nEuropeans, who have no scruples on the subject. Still, although they\nare pleased to see the monkeys driven off, and their crops saved, they\nwould rather lose all their harvest than allow a single monkey to be\nkilled, and in the earlier years of our Indian colony, several riots\ntook place between the natives and the English, because the latter had\nkilled a monkey through ignorance of the reverence in which it was\nheld.\n\nAnother monkey which may probably have been brought to Palestine from\nIndia is the HOONUMAN, ENTELLUS, or MAKUR, which is more reverenced by\nthe Hindoos than any other species. Its scientific title is _Presbytes\nentellus_. In some parts of India it is worshipped as a form of\ndivinity, and in all it is reverenced and protected to such an extent\nthat it becomes a positive nuisance to Europeans who are not\ninfluenced by the same superstitious ideas as those which are so\nprevalent in India. Being a very common species, it could easily be\ncaptured, especially if, as is likely to be the case, it was fearless\nof man through long immunity from harm. The sailors who manned\nSolomon's navy would not trouble themselves about the sacred character\nof the monkeys, but would take them without the least scruple wherever\nthey could be found.\n\nThe Hoonuman would also be valued by them on account of its docility\nwhen taken young, and the amusing tricks which it is fond of\ndisplaying in captivity as well as in a state of freedom. Moreover, it\nis rather a pretty creature, the general colour being yellowish, and\nthe face black.\n\nPerfectly aware of the impunity with which they are permitted to act,\nthese monkeys prefer human habitations to the forests which form the\nnatural home of their race, and crowd into the villages and temples,\nthe latter being always swarming with the long-tailed host. As is the\ncase with the Rhesus, the Hoonuman monkeys are much too fond of\nhelping themselves from the shops and stalls, and if they can find a\nconvenient roof, will sit there and watch for the arrival of the most\ndainty fruits.\n\nHowever, the natives, superstitious as they are, and unwilling to\ninflict personal injury on a monkey, have no scruple in making\narrangements by which a monkey that trespasses on forbidden spots will\ninflict injury on itself. They may not shoot or wound in any way the\nmonkeys which cluster on their roofs, and the animals are so perfectly\naware of the fact, that they refuse to be driven away by shouts and\nmenacing gestures. But, they contrive to make the roofs so\nuncomfortable by covering them with thorns, that the monkeys are\nobliged to quit their points of vantage, and to choose some spot where\nthey can sit down without fear of hurting themselves.\n\nThat the Hindoos should pay homage almost divine to a monkey, does\nseem equally absurd and contemptible. But, strange as this\nsuperstition may be, and the more strange because the intellectual\npowers of the educated Hindoos are peculiarly subtle and penetrating,\nit was shared by a greater, a mightier, and a still more intellectual\nrace, now extinct as a nation. The ancient Egyptians worshipped the\nbaboon, and ranked it among the most potent of their deities; and it\ncan but strike us with wonder when we reflect that a people who could\nerect buildings perfectly unique in the history of the world, who held\nthe foremost place in civilization, who perfected arts which we, at a\ndistance of three thousand years, have only just learned, should pay\ndivine honours to monkeys, bulls, and snakes. Such, however, was the\ncase; and we find that the modern Hindoo shows as great reverence for\nthe identical animals as did the Egyptian when Pharaoh was king, and\nJoseph his prime minister.\n\nIt is said by some, that neither the Egyptian of the ancient times,\nnor the Hindoo of the present day, actually worshipped those\ncreatures, but that they reverenced them as external signs of some\nattribute of God. Precisely the same remarks have been made as to the\nworship of idols, and it is likely enough that the highly educated\namong the worshippers did look upon a serpent merely as an emblem of\ndivine wisdom, a bull as an image of divine strength, and a monkey as\nan external memorial of the promised incarnation of divinity. So with\nidols, which to the man of educated and enlarged mind were nothing but\nvisible symbols employed for the purpose of directing the mind in\nworship. But, though this was the case with the educated and\nintellectual, the ignorant and uncultivated, who compose the great\nmass of a nation, did undoubtedly believe that both the living animal\nand the lifeless idol were themselves divine, and did worship them\naccordingly.\n\n [Illustration: THE WANDEROO.]\n\nThere is one species of monkey, which is extremely likely to have been\nbrought to Palestine, and used for the adornment of a luxurious\nmonarch's palace. This is the WANDEROO, or NIL-BHUNDER (_Silenus\nveter_). The Wanderoo, or Ouanderoo, as the name is sometimes spelled,\nis a very conspicuous animal, on account of the curious mane that\ncovers its neck and head, and the peculiarly formed tail, which is\nrather long and tufted, like that of a baboon, and has caused it to be\nranked among those animals by several writers, under the name of the\nLion-tailed Baboon. That part of the hairy mass which rolls over the\nhead is nearly black, but as it descends over the shoulders, it\nassumes a greyer tinge, and in some specimens is nearly white,\nreminding the observer of the huge wigs which were so prevalent in the\ntime of Charles II, or of the scarcely less enormous head-dresses with\nwhich our judges are decorated. As is the case with many animals, the\nmane is not seen in the young specimens, and increases in size with\nage, only reaching its full dimensions when the animal has attained\nadult age. Moreover, the grey hue belongs exclusively to the elder\nmonkeys, and only in the oldest specimens is the full, white,\nvenerable, wig-like mane to be seen in perfection.\n\nIn captivity, the general demeanour of this monkey corresponds with\nits grave and dignified aspect. It seems to be more sedate than the\nordinary monkeys, to judge from the specimens which have lived in the\nZoological Gardens, and sits peering with its shiny brown eyes out of\nthe enormous mane, with as much gravity as if it were really a judge\ndeciding an important case in law. Not that it will not condescend to\nthe little tricks and playful sallies for which the monkeys are so\ncelebrated; but it soon loses the vivacity of youth, and when\nfull-grown, presents as great a contrast to its former vivacity, as\ndoes a staid full-grown cat sitting by the fire, to the restless,\nlively, playful kitten of three months old. During its growth, it can\nbe taught to go through several amusing performances, but it has\nlittle of the quick, mercurial manner, which is generally found among\nthe monkey tribe.\n\nThe docility of the Wanderoo often vanishes together with its youth.\nThe same animal may be gentle, tractable, and teachable when young,\nand yet, when a few years have passed over its head and whitened its\nmane, may be totally obstinate and dull, refusing to perform the feats\nwhich it accomplished in its youth, or to learn others more suitable\nto its years. Consistent kind treatment will, however, have its effect\nupon the creature, but as a general rule, an old Wanderoo is apt to be\na treacherous and spiteful animal.\n\nThe natives of the country in which the Wanderoo lives, attribute to\nit the wisdom which its venerable aspect seems to imply, much as the\nancient Athenians venerated the owl as the bird of wisdom, and the\nchosen companion of the learned Minerva. In many places, the Wanderoo\nis thought to be a sort of king among monkeys, and to enjoy the same\nsupremacy over its maneless kinsfolk, that the king-vulture maintains\nover the other vultures which are destitute of the brilliant crest\nthat marks its rank.\n\nI am induced to believe that the Wanderoo must have been one of the\nmonkeys which were brought to Solomon, for two reasons.\n\nIn the first place, it is a native both of India and Ceylon, and\ntherefore might have formed an article of merchandise, together with\nthe peacock, gold, and ivory. And if, as is extremely probable, the\nTharshish of the Scripture is identical with Ceylon, it is almost\ncertain that the Wanderoo would have been brought to Solomon, in order\nto increase the glories of his palace. Sir Emerson Tennant points out\nvery forcibly, that in the Tamil language, the words for apes, ivory,\nand peacocks, are identical with the Hebrew names for the same\nobjects, and thus gives a very strong reason for supposing that Ceylon\nwas the country from which Solomon's fleet drew its supplies.\n\nAnother reason for conjecturing that the Wanderoo would have been one\nof the animals sent to grace the palace of Solomon is this. In the\ndays when that mighty sovereign lived, as indeed has been the case in\nall partially civilized countries, the kings and rulers have felt a\npride in collecting together the rarest objects which they could\npurchase, giving the preference to those which were in any way\nconspicuous, whether for intrinsic value, for size, for beauty, or for\nugliness. Thus, giants, dwarfs, and deformed persons of either sex,\nand even idiots, were seen as regular attendants at the court, a\ncustom which extended even into the modern history of this country,\nthe \"Fool\" being an indispensable appendage to the train of every\nperson of rank. Animals from foreign lands were also prized, and value\nwas set upon them, not only for their variety, but for any external\ncharacteristic which would make them especially conspicuous.\n\nOrdinary sovereigns would make collections of such objects, simply\nbecause they were rare, and in accordance with the general custom;\nand in importing the \"apes\" and peacocks together with the gold and\nivory, Solomon but followed the usual custom. He, however, on whom the\ngift of wisdom had been especially bestowed, would have another motive\nbesides ostentation or curiosity. He was learned in the study of that\nscience which we now call Natural History. It is, therefore, extremely\nprobable, that he would not neglect any opportunities of procuring\nanimals from distant lands, in order that he might study the products\nof countries which he had not personally visited, and it is not likely\nthat so conspicuous an animal as the Wanderoo would have escaped the\nnotice of those who provided the cargo for which so wealthy a king\ncould pay, and for which they would demand a price proportionate to\nits variety.\n\nThere is perhaps no monkey which is so conspicuous among its kin as\nthe Wanderoo, and certainly no monkey or ape inhabiting those parts of\nthe world to which the fleet of Solomon would have access. Its staid,\nsedate manners, its black body, lion-like tail, and huge white-edged\nmane, would distinguish it so boldly from its kinsfolk, that the\nsailors would use all their efforts to capture an animal for which\nthey would be likely to obtain a high price.\n\nThe peculiar and unique character of Solomon affords good reason for\nconjecture that, not only were several species of the monkey tribe\nincluded under the general word Kophim, but that the number of species\nmust have been very large. An ordinary monarch would have been content\nwith one or two species, and would probably have been perfectly\nsatisfied if a number of monkeys had been brought from beyond seas,\nirrespective of distinction of species. But, if we consider the\ncharacter of Solomon, we shall find that he would not have been\ncontent with such imperfect knowledge. We are told that he wrote\nlargely of the various productions of the earth, and, to judge him by\nourselves, it is certain that with such magnificent means at his\ncommand, he would have ransacked every country that his ships could\nvisit, for the purpose of collecting materials for his works. It is\ntherefore almost certain that under the word Kophim may be included\nall the most plentiful species of monkey which inhabit the countries\nto which his fleet had access, and that in his palace were collected\ntogether specimens of each monkey which has here been mentioned,\nbesides many others of which no special notice need be taken, such as\nthe Bonnet Monkeys, and other Macaques.\n\nWe now come to the vexed question of the SATYRS, respecting which word\ngreat controversies have been raised. The Hebrew word Seirim merely\nsignifies \"hairy beings,\" and does not seem to be applied to any\ndefinite species of animal. Several scholars, therefore, translate the\nword by \"wild goats,\" and instead of reading the passages (Is. xiii.\n21, and xxxiv. 14) \"Satyrs shall dance there,\" they read them, \"The\nhe-goats shall skip there.\" This is certainly an easier interpretation\nthan that which is accepted in our translation, but whether it is more\ncorrect may be doubted. Moreover, the word \"goat\" would not convey the\nidea of utter desolation which the prophecy implied, and which has\nbeen so signally fulfilled in the Babylon of the present day. The vast\npalaces and temples have sunk into shapeless heaps of ruins, affording\nscarcely a trace by which the buildings can be identified. The many\nmassive gates, for which the city was famous, have disappeared. The\ndouble lines of fortification are only to be distinguished by a few\nscattered mounds, while the wonderful palace of Nebuchadnezzar has\nleft but a few shattered walls as relics of an edifice whose fame\nspread over the world.\n\nWhat precise animal was meant by the word Seirim cannot be\nascertained, nor is it even certain whether the word signified any\nparticular species at all. The ancient commentators identified Seirim\nwith the semi-human creatures of mythology, known as Satyrs, and\nstrengthened this opinion by a reference to Lev. xvii. 7, where the\nIsraelites are warned against worshipping Seirim, or \"devils\"\naccording to our translation. In common with all the civilized world,\nthey fully believed that Satyrs were veritable inhabitants of the\nwoods and deserts, with forms half man half goat, with powers more\nthan human, and with passions below humanity. Of course we cannot now\naccept such an interpretation, but must grant, either that a mere\nmetaphor of desolation was intended, or that the prophecy alluded to\nvarious wild animals that inhabit deserted places. Accept which\ninterpretation we will, it is impossible to identify any particular\nanimal with the \"Satyr\" of Isaiah, and therefore it will be better to\ndecline giving any opinion on a subject which cannot be definitely\nexplained.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BAT.\n\n The Bat mentioned always with abhorrence--Meaning of the Hebrew\n name--The prohibition against eating Bats--The edible species,\n their food and mode of life--The noisome character of the Bat,\n and the nature of its dwelling-place--Its hatred of\n light--Baruch and his prophecy--Appropriateness of the\n prophecy--Singular Mahommedan legend respecting the original\n creation of the Bat--The legend compared with the apocryphal\n gospels--The Bats of Palestine--Mr. Tristram's discoveries--Bats\n found in the quarries from which the stone of the Temple was\n hewn--Edible Bats in a cave near the centre of\n Palestine--Another species of long-tailed Bat captured in the\n rock caves where hermits had been buried--Other species which\n probably inhabit Palestine.\n\n\nAmong the animals that are forbidden to be eaten by the Israelites we\nfind the BAT prominently mentioned, and in one or two parts of\nScripture the same creature is alluded to with evident abhorrence. In\nIsaiah ii. 20, for example, it is prophesied that when the day of the\nLord comes, the worshippers of idols will try to hide themselves from\nthe presence of the Lord, and will cast their false gods to the bats\nand the moles, both animals being evidently used as emblems of\ndarkness and ignorance, and associated together for a reason which\nwill be given when treating of the mole. The Hebrew name of the Bat is\nexpressive of its nocturnal habits, and literally signifies some being\nthat flies by night, and it is a notable fact that the Greek and Latin\nnames for the bat have also a similar derivation.\n\nIn Lev. xi. 20, the words, \"All fowls that creep, going upon all four,\nshall be an abomination unto you,\" are evidently intended to apply to\nthe bat, which, as is now well known, is not a bird with wings, but a\nmammal with very long toes, and a well developed membrane between\nthem. Like other mammals, the Bat crawls, or walks, on all four legs,\nthough the movement is but a clumsy one, and greatly different from\nthe graceful ease with which the creature urges its course through the\nevening air in search of food.\n\nPerhaps the prohibition to eat so unsightly an animal may seem almost\nneedless; but it must be remembered that in several parts of the\nearth, certain species of Bat are used as food. These are chiefly the\nlarge species, that are called Kalongs, and which feed almost entirely\non fruit, thus being to their insectivorous relatives what the\nfruit-loving bear is among the larger carnivora. These edible Bats\nhave other habits not shared by the generality of their kin. Some of\nthe species do not retire to caves and hollow trees for shelter during\ntheir hours of sleep, but suspend themselves by their hind legs from\nthe topmost branches of the trees whose fruit affords them\nnourishment. In this position they have a most singular aspect,\nlooking much as if they themselves were large bunches of fruit hanging\nfrom the boughs. Thus, they are cleanly animals, and are as little\nrepulsive as bats can be expected to be.\n\nBut the ordinary bats, such as are signified by the \"night-fliers\" of\nthe Scriptures, are, when in a state of nature, exceedingly unpleasant\ncreatures. Almost all animals are infested with parasitic insects, but\nthe Bat absolutely swarms with them, so that it is impossible to\nhandle a Bat recently dead without finding some of them on the hands.\nAlso, the bats are in the habit of resorting to caverns, clefts in the\nrocks, deserted ruins, and similar dark places, wherein they pass the\nhours of daylight, and will frequent the same spots for a long series\nof years. In consequence of this habit, the spots which they select\nfor their resting place become inconceivably noisome, and can scarcely\nbe entered by human beings, so powerful is the odour with which they\nare imbued.\n\nSometimes, when travellers have been exploring the chambers of ruined\nbuildings, or have endeavoured to penetrate into the recesses of rocky\ncaves, they have been repelled by the bats which had taken up their\nhabitation therein. No sooner does the light of the torch or lamp\nshine upon the walls, than the clusters of bats detach themselves from\nthe spots to which they had been clinging, and fly to the light like\nmoths to a candle. No torch can withstand the multitude of wings that\ncome flapping about it, sounding like the rushing of a strong wind,\nwhile the bats that do not crowd around the light, dash against the\nexplorers, beating their leathery wings against their faces, and\nclinging in numbers to their dress. They would even settle on the\nface unless kept off by the hands, and sometimes they force the\nintruders to beat a retreat. They do not intend to attack, for they\nare quite incapable of doing any real damage; and, in point of fact,\nthey are much more alarmed than those whom they annoy. Nocturnal in\ntheir habits, they cannot endure the light, which completely dazzles\nthem, so that they dash about at random, and fly blindly towards the\ntorches in their endeavours to escape.\n\nIf, then, we keep in mind the habits of the bats, we shall comprehend\nthat their habitations must be inexpressibly revolting to human\nbeings, and shall the better understand the force of the prophecy that\nthe idols shall be cast to the bats and the moles.\n\nThere is another, and a very forcible passage, in which the Bat is\nmentioned. In the apocryphal book of Baruch, the Bat is used as a\nlively image of something peculiarly repulsive and hateful. Baruch was\nthe secretary and faithful friend of Jeremiah the prophet, and Chapter\nVI. of the book of Baruch purports to be an epistle of Jeremiah to the\ncaptive Jews about to be led away to Babylon. After showing that they\nhad brought their fate upon themselves by neglecting the worship of\nthe true God, and prophesying that they would remain in captivity for\nseven generations, the writer proceeds, in a strain of scathing and\nsustained satire, to deride the idols which they had adored, and to\ncensure the infamous ceremonies that formed part of the worship.\n\nAfter describing the idols, made splendid with silver and gold, whose\nhands hold sceptres, and axes, and wands, and yet cannot save\nthemselves from robbers; whose tongues are polished by the workman and\nyet cannot speak a word; whose eyes are covered with dust which they\ncannot wipe off for themselves; he proceeds as follows: \"Their hearts\nare gnawed upon by things creeping out of the earth; and when they eat\nthem and their clothes they feel it not. Their faces are blacked\nthrough the smoke that cometh out of the Temple. Upon their bodies and\nheads sit bats, swallows and birds, and the cats also. By this ye may\nknow that they are no gods; therefore fear them not.\"\n\nIt is not to be expected that so strange looking an animal as the Bat\nwould escape mention in the legends which are so plentiful in the\nEast.\n\nSignor Pierotti, who has done such signal service in the investigation\nof the Holy Land, gives a most remarkable semi-Mahommedan and\nsemi-Christian legend respecting the origin of the Bat. The\nMahommedans, unlike the generality of Jews, have always respected the\nmemory of our Lord Christ--the Prophet Isa, as they call Him--ranking\nHim as one of the greatest of God's prophets, though they deny His\nactual divinity. In this curious legend, they have confused the forty\ndays fast in the wilderness with the enforced Mahommedan fast called\nRamadhan, much as the writers of the apocryphal gospels attributed to\nthe holy family and the apostles certain phrases and acts of worship\nwhich were not in existence until several centuries after the\nChristian era.\n\nTowards the west of Jericho, there is a mountain which is identified\nboth by Christians and Mahommedans as being the spot to which our Lord\nretired during his passion, and which, in consequence of this\nsupposition, is called Kuruntun, or Quarantine.\n\nThe reader, while perusing the following legend, must bear in mind\nthat the fast of Ramadhan lasts for a month, and that from sunrise to\nsunset an entire abstinence from all kinds of nourishment is\nimperative upon all good Mussulmans. Even such luxuries as smoking or\ninhaling perfumes are forbidden, and although washing is permitted,\nthe head must not be plunged under water, lest a few drops might find\ntheir way through the nostrils. In consequence of this strict\nprohibition, the moments of daybreak and sunset are noted with the\nmost scrupulous care, the tables being set, pipes lighted, coffee\nprepared, and every luxury being made ready just before sunset, so\nthat as the orb disappears beneath the horizon, the fasting multitudes\nmay not lose a moment in satisfying their wants. A similar anxiety\nmarks the approach of daybreak, because, as the first beams of the sun\nbreak through the darkness, neither food nor drink may pass their\nlips.\n\nWe will now proceed to the Mahommedan legend, as it is given by S.\nPierotti: \"In this wild spot the great prophet Isa retired with his\ndisciples to keep the holy month of the Ramadhan, afar from the\ntumults of the world. As the view westward was obstructed by the\nmountains of Jerusalem, and, consequently, the sunset could not be\nseen, he made, by the permission of God, an image in clay\nrepresenting a winged creature; and, after invoking the aid of the\nEternal, breathed upon it. Immediately it flapped its large wings, and\nfled into one of the dark caverns in the mountains. This creature was\nthe Khopash (bat), which lies hid so long as the sun shines upon the\nworld, and comes forth from its retreat when it sets. Every night, at\nthe Moghreb, _i.e._ at the moment of breaking the fast, this bat\nfluttered round Isa, who then prepared himself with his disciples for\nprayer.\n\n\"As soon as they had performed this sacred duty, the Merciful caused\nto descend from heaven a silver table, covered with a cloth whose\nbrilliancy illumined the darkness, on which were placed a large\nroasted fish, five loaves, salt, vinegar, oil, pomegranates, dates,\nand fresh salad, gathered in the gardens of heaven. On these the\nProphet supped, and the angels of heaven ministered at table.\"\n\nThis curious legend bears a great resemblance to the tales which are\ntold of our Lord's childhood in some of the spurious gospels. It shows\nthat both emanated from the same class of mind. In both is seen a\nstrange mixture of vivid imagination contrasted with unexpected and\nalmost puerile lack of invention; and, in both is exhibited a total\nfailure in apprehension of cause and effect. Indeed, it is evident\nthat this legend was the work of a comparatively modern Mahommedan\nstory-teller, who appropriated the forty days' fast of our Lord from\nthe true gospels, and the making of a flying creature of clay from the\nfalse, and modified them both to suit the purposes of his tale.\n\nNo particular species of Bat seems to be indicated by the Hebrew word\nHatalleph, which is evidently used in a comprehensive sense, and\nsignifies all and any species of Bat. Until very lately, the exact\nspecies of Bats which inhabit Palestine were not definitely\nascertained, and could only be conjectured. But, Mr. Tristram, who\ntravelled in the Holy Land for the express purpose of investigating\nits physical history, has set this point at rest, in his invaluable\nwork, \"The Land of Israel,\" to which frequent reference will be made\nin the course of the following pages.\n\nAlmost every cavern which he entered was tenanted by bats, and he\nprocured several species of these repulsive but interesting animals.\nWhile exploring the vast prairies in which the stone for the Temple\nwas worked beneath the earth, so that no sound of tool was heard\nduring the building, numbers of bats were disturbed by the lights, and\nfluttered over the heads of the exploring party.\n\nOn another occasion, he was exploring a cave near the centre of\nPalestine, when he succeeded in procuring some specimens, and\ntherefore in identifying at least one species. \"In climbing the rocks\nsoon afterwards, to examine a cave, I heard a singular whining chatter\nwithin, and on creeping into its recesses, a stone thrown up roused\nfrom their roosting-places a colony of large bats, the soft waving\nflap of whose wings I could hear in the darkness. How to obtain one I\nknew not; but on vigorously plying my signal whistle, all the party\nsoon gathered to my help. B. suggested smoking them, so a fire of\nbrushwood was kindled, and soon two or three rushed out. Two fell to\nour shot, and I was delighted to find myself the possessor of a couple\nof large fox-headed bats of the genus Pteropus (_Xantharpya\n\u00e6gyptiaca_), and extending twenty and a half inches from wing to wing.\nAs none of the bats of Palestine are yet known, this was a great\nprize, and another instance of the extension westward of the Indian\nfauna.\" These Bats belong to the fruit-eating tribe, and are closely\nallied to the Flying Foxes of Java, Australia, and Southern Africa.\nTherefore, this would be one of the species commonly used for food,\nand hence the necessity for the prohibition. The present species\nextends over the greater part of Northern Africa and into parts of\nAsia.\n\nThe same traveller subsequently discovered several more species of\nbats. On one occasion, he was exploring some caves, near the site of\nthe ancient Jericho. On the eastern face of the cliffs are a number of\ncaves, arranged in regular tiers, and originally approached by steps\ncut out of the face of the rock. These staircases are, however, washed\naway by time and the rains, and in consequence the upper tiers were\nalmost inaccessible. In some of these caves the walls were covered\nwith brilliant, but mutilated frescoes; and in others, hermits had\nlived and died and been buried. Mr. Tristram and his companions had\npenetrated to the second tier, and there made a curious discovery.\n\n [Illustration: THE BAT.\n\n \"_The Lapwing and the Bat are unclean._\"--LEV. xi. 19.]\n\n\"In the roof of this was a small hole, athwart which lay a stick.\nAfter many efforts, we got a string across it, and so hauled up a\nrope, by which, finding the stick strong enough, we climbed, and with\na short exercise of the chimney-sweeper's art, we found ourselves in a\nthird tier of cells, similar to the lower ones, and covered with the\nundisturbed dust of ages. Behind the chapel was a dark cave, with an\nentrance eighteen inches high. Having lighted our lantern, we crept in\non our faces, and found the place full of human bones and skulls; with\ndust several inches deep. We were in the burying-place of the\nAnchorites. Their bones lay heaped, but in undisturbed order, probably\nas the corpses had been stretched soon after death, and as in the\ncampo-santo of some Italian monasteries, had been desiccated, and in\nthe dry atmosphere had gradually pulverized. The skeletons were laid\nwest and east, awaiting the resurrection. After capturing two or three\nlong-tailed bats, of a species new to us (_Rhinopoma microphylla_),\nthe only living occupants, we crept out, with a feeling of religious\nawe, from this strange sepulchral cave.\" This bat is called the\nEgyptian Rhinopome, and the same species of Bat was found in\nconsiderable numbers in the cave at Es Sumrah. Three more species were\nfound in the tombs of the kings, and it is probable that many other\nspecies inhabit Palestine. It is certain, at all events, that\nrepresentatives of three more families of Bats inhabit Egypt, and\ntherefore are most probably to be found in Palestine.\n\n\n\n\nTHE LION.\n\n Frequent mention of the Lion in the Scriptures--Probability that\n it was once a common animal, though now extinct--Reasons for its\n disappearance--The Lion employed as an emblem in the\n Bible--Similarity of the African and Asiatic species--The chief\n characteristics of the Lion--its strength, activity, and mode of\n seizing its prey--Various names of the Lion--its courage when\n roused--its roar and peculiar mode of utterance--Invisibility of\n the Lion at dusk--The Lion lying in wait--The dwelling-place of\n the Lion--Its restlessness at night--Passages illustrative of\n these characteristics--Modes of capturing the Lion--The pitfall\n and the net--Lions kept as curiosities--The Lion hunt as\n depicted, on the buildings of ancient Nineveh.\n\n\nOf all the undomesticated animals of Palestine, none is mentioned so\nfrequently as the LION. This may appear the more remarkable, because\nfor many years the Lion has been extinct in Palestine. The leopard,\nthe wolf, the jackal, and the hy\u00e6na, still retain their place in the\nland, although their numbers are comparatively few; but the Lion has\nvanished completely out of the land. The reason for this disappearance\nis twofold, first, the thicker population; and second, the\nintroduction of firearms.\n\nNo animal is less tolerant of human society than the Lion. In the\nfirst place, it dreads the very face of man, and as a rule, whenever\nit sees a man will slink away and hide itself. There are, of course,\nexceptional cases to this rule. Sometimes a Lion becomes so old and\nstiff, his teeth are so worn, and his endurance so slight, that he is\nunable to chase his usual prey, and is obliged to seek for other means\nof subsistence. In an unpopulated district, he would simply be starved\nto death, but when his lot is cast in the neighbourhood of human\nbeings, he is perforce obliged to become a \"man-eater.\" Even in that\ncase, a Lion will seldom attack a man, unless he should be able to do\nso unseen, but will hang about the villages, pouncing on the women as\nthey come to the wells for water, or upon the little children as they\nstray from their parents, and continually shifting his quarters lest\nhe should be assailed during his sleep. The Lion requires a very large\ntract of country for his maintenance, and the consequence is, that in\nproportion as the land is populated does the number of Lions decrease.\n\nFirearms are the special dread of the Lion. In the first place, the\nLion, like all wild beasts, cannot endure fire, and the flash of the\ngun terrifies him greatly. Then, there is the report, surpassing even\nhis roar in resonance; and lastly, there is the unseen bullet, which\nseldom kills him at once, but mostly drives him to furious anger by\nthe pain of his wound, yet which he does not dread nearly so much as\nthe harmless flash and report. There is another cause of the Lions\nbanishment from the Holy Land. It is well known that to attract any\nwild beast or bird to some definite spot, all that is required is to\nprovide them with a suitable and undisturbed home, and a certainty of\nfood. Consequently, the surest method of driving them away is to\ndeprive them of both these essentials. Then the Lion used to live in\nforests, which formerly stretched over large tracts of ground, but\nwhich have long since been cut down, thus depriving the Lion of its\nhome, while the thick population and the general use of firearms have\ndeprived him of his food. In fact, the Lion has been driven out of\nPalestine, just as the wolf has been extirpated from England.\n\nBut, in the olden times, Lions must have been very plentiful. There is\nscarcely a book in the Bible, whether of the Old or New Testaments,\nwhether historical or prophetical, that does not contain some mention\nof this terrible animal; sometimes describing the actions of\nindividual Lions, but mostly using the word as an emblem of strength\nand force, whether used for a good purpose or abused for a bad one.\n\nThere are several varieties of Lion, which may be reduced to two,\nnamely, the African and the Asiatic Lion. It is almost certain,\nhowever, that these animals really are one and the same species, and\nthat the trifling differences which exist between an African and an\nAsiatic Lion, are not sufficient to justify a naturalist in\nconsidering them to be distinct species. The habits of both are\nidentical, modified, as is sure to be the case, by the difference of\nlocality; but then, such variations in habit are continually seen in\nanimals confessedly of the same species, which happen to be placed in\ndifferent conditions of climate and locality.\n\nThat it was once exceedingly plentiful in Palestine is evident, from a\nvery cursory knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. It is every where\nmentioned as a well-known animal, equally familiar and dreaded. When\nthe disobedient prophet was killed by the Lion near Bethel, the fact\nseemed not to have caused any surprise in the neighbourhood. When the\npeople came out to rescue the body of the prophet, they wondered much\nbecause the Lion was standing by the fallen man, but had not torn him,\nand had left the ass unhurt. But that a Lion should have killed a man\nseems to have been an event which was not sufficiently rare to be\nsurprising.\n\nWe will now proceed to those characteristics of the Lion which bear\nespecial reference to the Scriptures.\n\nIn the first place, size for size, the Lion is one of the strongest of\nbeasts. Perhaps it is surpassed in point of sheer strength by the\nmole, but it possesses infinitely more activity than that animal.\nMoreover, the strength of the mole is concentrated in its\nfore-quarters, the hind limbs being comparatively feeble; whereas, the\nstrength of the Lion is equally distributed over the body and limbs,\ngiving to the animal an easy grace of movement which is rare except\nwith such a structure. A full-grown Lion cannot only knock down and\nkill, but can carry away in its mouth, an ordinary ox; and one of\nthese terrible animals has been known to pick up a heifer in its\nmouth, and to leap over a wide ditch still carrying its burden.\nAnother Lion carried a two-year old heifer, and was chased for five\nhours by mounted farmers, so that it must have traversed a very\nconsiderable distance. Yet, in the whole of this long journey, the\nlegs of the heifer had only two or three times touched the ground.\n\nIt kills man, and comparatively small animals, such as deer and\nantelopes, with a blow of its terrible paw; and often needs to give no\nsecond blow to cause the death of its victim. The sharp talons are not\nneeded to cause death, for the weight of the blow is sufficient for\nthat purpose.\n\nWhen the hunter pursues it with dogs, after the usual fashion, there\nis often a great slaughter among them, especially among those that are\ninexperienced in the chase of the Lion. Urged by their instinctive\nantipathy, the dogs rush forward to the spot where the Lion awaits\nthem, and old hounds bay at him from a safe distance, while the young\nand inexperienced among them are apt to convert the sham attack into a\nreal one. Their valour meets with a poor reward, for a few blows from\nthe Lion's terrible paws send his assailants flying in all directions,\ntheir bodies streaming with blood, and in most cases a fatal damage\ninflicted, while more than one unfortunate dog lies fairly crushed by\nthe weight of a paw laid with apparent carelessness upon its body.\nThere is before me a Lion's skin, a spoil of one of these animals shot\nby the celebrated sportsman, Gordon Cumming. Although the skin lies\nflat upon the floor, and the paws are nothing but the skin and talons,\nthe weight of each paw is very considerable, and always surprises\nthose who hear it fall on the floor.\n\nThere are several Hebrew words which are used for the Lion, but that\nwhich signifies the animal in its adult state is derived from an\nArabic word signifying strength; and therefore the Lion is called the\nStrong-one, just as the Bat is called the Night-flier. No epithet\ncould be better deserved, for the Lion seems to be a very incarnation\nof strength, and, even when dead, gives as vivid an idea of\nconcentrated power as when it was living. And, when the skin is\nstripped from the body, the tremendous muscular development never\nfails to create a sensation of awe. The muscles of the limbs,\nthemselves so hard as to blunt the keen-edged knives employed by a\ndissecter, are enveloped in their glittering sheaths, playing upon\neach other like well-oiled machinery, and terminating in tendons\nseemingly strong as steel, and nearly as impervious to the knife. Not\nuntil the skin is removed can any one form a conception of the\nenormously powerful muscles of the neck, which enable the Lion to lift\nthe weighty prey which it kills, and to convey it to a place of\nsecurity.\n\nAlthough usually unwilling to attack an armed man, it is one of the\nmost courageous animals in existence when it is driven to fight, and\nif its anger is excited, it cares little for the number of its foes,\nor the weapons with which they are armed. Even the dreaded firearms\nlose their terrors to an angry Lion, while a Lioness, who fears for\nthe safety of her young, is simply the most terrible animal in\nexistence. We know how even a hen will fight for her chickens, and how\nshe has been known to beat off the fox and the hawk by the reckless\nfury of her attack. It may be easily imagined, therefore, that a\nLioness actuated by equal courage, and possessed of the terrible\nweapons given to her by her Creator, would be an animal almost too\nformidable for the conception of those who have not actually witnessed\nthe scene of a Lioness defending her little ones.\n\nThe roar of the Lion is another of the characteristics for which it is\ncelebrated. There is no beast that can produce a sound that could for\na moment be mistaken for the roar of the Lion. The Lion has a habit of\nstooping his head towards the ground when he roars, so that the\nterrible sound rolls along like thunder, and reverberates in many an\necho in the far distance. Owing to this curious habit, the roar can be\nheard at a very great distance, but its locality is rendered\nuncertain, and it is often difficult to be quite sure whether the Lion\nis to the right or the left of the hearer.\n\nThere are few sounds which strike more awe than the Lion's roar. Even\nat the Zoological Gardens, where the hearer knows that he is in\nperfect safety, and where the Lion is enclosed in a small cage faced\nwith strong iron bars, the sound of the terrible roar always has a\ncurious effect upon the nerves. It is not exactly fear, because the\nhearer knows that he is safe; but it is somewhat akin to the feeling\nof mixed awe and admiration with which one listens to the crashing\nthunder after the lightning has sped its course. If such be the case\nwhen the Lion is safely housed in a cage, and is moreover so tame that\neven if he did escape, he would be led back by the keeper without\ndoing any harm, the effect of the roar must indeed be terrific when\nthe Lion is at liberty, when he is in his own country, and when the\nshades of evening prevent him from being seen even at a short\ndistance.\n\nIn the dark, there is no animal so invisible as a Lion. Almost every\nhunter has told a similar story--of the Lion's approach at night, of\nthe terror displayed by dogs and cattle as he drew near, and of the\nutter inability to see him, though he was so close that they could\nhear his breathing. Sometimes, when he has crept near an encampment,\nor close to a cattle inclosure, he does not proceed any farther lest\nhe should venture within the radius illumined by the rays of the fire.\nSo he crouches closely to the ground, and, in the semi-darkness, looks\nso like a large stone, or a little hillock, that any one might pass\nclose to it without perceiving its real nature. This gives the\nopportunity for which the Lion has been watching, and in a moment he\nstrikes down the careless straggler, and carries off his prey to the\nden. Sometimes, when very much excited, he accompanies the charge with\na roar, but, as a general fact, he secures his prey in silence.\n\nThe roar of the Lion is very peculiar. It is not a mere outburst of\nsound, but a curiously graduated performance. No description of the\nLion's roar is so vivid, so true, and so graphic as that of Gordon\nCumming: \"One of the most striking things connected with the Lion is\nhis voice, which is extremely grand and peculiarly striking. It\nconsists at times of a low, deep moaning, repeated five or six times,\nending in faintly audible sighs. At other times he startles the forest\nwith loud, deep-toned, solemn roars, repeated five or six times in\nquick succession, each increasing in loudness to the third or fourth,\nwhen his voice dies away in five or six low, muffled sounds, very much\nresembling distant thunder. As a general rule, Lions roar during the\nnight, their sighing moans commencing as the shades of evening envelop\nthe forest, and continuing at intervals throughout the night. In\ndistant and secluded regions, however, I have constantly heard them\nroaring loudly as late as nine or ten o'clock on a bright sunny\nmorning. In hazy and rainy weather they are to be heard at every hour\nin the day, but their roar is subdued.\"\n\nLastly, we come to the dwelling-place of the Lion. This animal always\nfixes its residence in the depths of some forest, through which it\nthreads its stealthy way with admirable certainty. No fox knows every\nhedgerow, ditch, drain, and covert better than the Lion knows the\nwhole country around his den. Each Lion seems to have his peculiar\ndistrict, in which only himself and his family will be found. These\nanimals seem to parcel out the neighbourhood among themselves by a\ntacit law like that which the dogs of eastern countries have imposed\nupon themselves, and which forbids them to go out of the district in\nwhich they were born. During the night he traverses his dominions;\nand, as a rule, he retires to his den as soon as the sun is fairly\nabove the horizon. Sometimes he will be in wait for prey in the\nbroadest daylight, but his ordinary habits are nocturnal, and in the\ndaytime he is usually asleep in his secret dwelling-place.\n\nWe will now glance at a few of the passages in which the Lion is\nmentioned in the Holy Scriptures, selecting those which treat of its\nvarious characteristics.\n\nThe terrible strength of the Lion is the subject of repeated\nreference. In the magnificent series of prophecies uttered by Jacob on\nhis deathbed, the power of the princely tribe of Judah is predicted\nunder the metaphor of a Lion--the beginning of its power as a Lion's\nwhelp, the fulness of its strength as an adult Lion, and its matured\nestablishment in power as the old Lion that couches himself and none\ndares to disturb him. Then Solomon, in the Proverbs, speaks of the\nLion as the \"strongest among beasts, and that turneth not away for\nany.\"\n\nSolomon also alludes to its courage in the same book, Prov. xxviii. 1,\nin the well-known passage, \"The wicked fleeth when no man pursueth:\nbut the righteous are bold as a lion.\" And, in 2 Sam. xxiii. 20, the\ncourage of Benaiah, one of the mighty three of David's army, is\nspecially honoured, because he fought and killed a Lion single-handed,\nand because he conquered \"two lion-like men of Moab.\" David, their\nleader, had also distinguished himself, when a mere keeper of cattle,\nby pursuing and killing a Lion that had come to plunder his herd. In\nthe same book of Samuel which has just been quoted (xvii. 10), the\nvaliant men are metaphorically described as having the hearts of\nLions.\n\nThe ferocity of this terrible beast of prey is repeatedly mentioned,\nand the Psalms are full of such allusions, the fury and anger of\nenemies being compared to the attacks of the Lion.\n\nMany passages refer to the Lion's roar, and it is remarkable that the\nHebrew language contains several words by which the different kind of\nroar is described. One word, for example, represents the low, deep,\nthunder-like roar of the Lion seeking its prey, and which has already\nbeen mentioned. This is the word which is used in Amos iii. 4, \"Will a\nlion roar in the forest when he hath no prey?\" and in this passage the\nword which is translated as Lion signifies the animal when full grown\nand in the prime of life. Another word is used to signify the sudden\nexulting cry of the Lion as it leaps upon its victim. A third is used\nfor the angry growl with which a Lion resents any endeavour to deprive\nit of its prey, a sound with which we are all familiar, on a miniature\nscale, when we hear a cat growling over a mouse which she has just\ncaught. The fourth term signifies the peculiar roar uttered by the\nyoung Lion after it has ceased to be a cub and before it has attained\nmaturity. This last term is employed in Jer. li. 38, \"They shall\n_roar_ together like lions; they shall _yell_ as lions' whelps,\" in\nwhich passage two distinct words are used, one signifying the roar of\nthe Lion when searching after prey, and the other the cry of the young\nLions.\n\nThe prophet Amos, who in his capacity of herdsman was familiar with\nthe wild beasts, from which he had to guard his cattle, makes frequent\nmention of the Lion, and does so with a force and vigour that betoken\npractical experience. How powerful is this imagery, \"The lion hath\nroared; who will not fear? The Lord God hath spoken; who can but\nprophesy?\" Here we have the picture of the man himself, the herdsman\nand prophet, who had trembled many a night, as the Lions drew nearer\nand nearer; and who heard the voice of the Lord, and his lips poured\nout prophecy. Nothing can be more complete than the parallel which he\nhas drawn. It breathes the very spirit of piety, and may bear\ncomparison even with the prophecies of Isaiah for its simple grandeur.\n\nIt is remarkable how the sacred writers have entered into the spirit\nof the world around them, and how closely they observed the minutest\ndetails even in the lives of the brute beasts. There is a powerful\npassage in the book of Job, iv. 11, \"The old lion perisheth for lack\nof prey,\" in which the writer betrays his thorough knowledge of the\nhabits of the animal, and is aware that the usual mode of a Lion's\ndeath is through hunger, in consequence of his increasing inability to\ncatch prey.\n\nThe nocturnal habits of the Lion and its custom of lying in wait for\nprey are often mentioned in the Scriptures. The former habit is spoken\nof in that familiar and beautiful passage in the Psalms (civ. 20),\n\"Thou makest darkness, and it is night; wherein all the beasts of the\nforest do creep forth. The young Lions roar after their prey; and seek\ntheir meat from God. The sun ariseth, they gather themselves together,\nand lay them down in their dens.\"\n\nIts custom of lying in wait is frequently alluded to. See Psalm x. 9,\nwhere it is said of the wicked man, that \"He lieth in wait secretly,\nas a lion in his den.\" Also, Lam. iii. 10, \"He was unto me as a bear\nlying in wait, and as a lion in secret places.\" Also, Ps. xvii. 11,\nwherein the peculiar gait and demeanour of the Lion is admirably\ndepicted, \"They have now compassed us in our steps; they have set\ntheir eyes bowing down to the earth; like as a lion that is greedy of\nhis prey, and as it were a young lion lurking in secret places.\"\n\nThe retired spots, deep in the forest, where the Lion makes his den,\nare repeatedly mentioned. See for example, Cant. iv. 8, \"Look from the\ntop of Amana, from the top of Shenir and Hermon, from the lions'\ndens.\" Also, Jer. iv. 7, \"The lion is come up from his thicket, and\nthe destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way.\" The same Prophet\ncontains several passages illustrative of the Lion's habitation; see\nch. v. 6, \"Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay them;\" xii.\n8, \"Mine heritage is unto me as a lion in the forest;\" and lastly,\nxxv. 38, \"He hath forsaken his covert as the lion.\"\n\nAn animal so destructive among the flocks and herds could not be\nallowed to carry out its depredations unchecked, and as we have\nalready seen, the warfare waged against it has been so successful,\nthat the Lions have long ago been fairly extirpated in Palestine. The\nusual method of capturing or killing the Lion was by pitfalls or nets,\nto both of which there are many references in the Scriptures.\n\n [Illustration: THE LION.\n\n \"The lion is come up from his thicket.\"--JER.. iv. 7.\n\n \"She lay down among lions, she nourished her whelps among young\n lions.\"--EZEKIEL. xix. 2.]\n\nThe mode of hunting the Lion with nets was identical with that which\nis practised in India at the present time. The precise locality of the\nLion's dwelling-place having been discovered, a circular wall of net\nis arranged round it, or if only a few nets can be obtained, they are\nset in a curved form, the concave side being towards the Lion. They\nthen send dogs into the thicket, hurl stones and sticks at the\nden, shoot arrows into it, fling burning torches at it, and so\nirritate and alarm the animal that it rushes against the net, which\nis so made that it falls down and envelopes the animal in its folds.\nIf the nets be few, the drivers go to the opposite side of the den,\nand induce the Lion to escape in the direction where he sees no foes,\nbut where he is sure to run against the treacherous net. Other large\nand dangerous animals were also captured by the same means.\n\nAllusions to this sort of hunting are familiar to all students of the\nBible. In the book of Job, xix. 6, the writer laments that \"God hath\ncompassed me with his net,\" in allusion to the custom of surrounding\nthe den of the animal. The Psalms make frequent mention of the net as\nused in hunting. See Ps. ix. 15, \"In the net they hid is their foot\ntaken.\" Ps. xxxv. 8, \"Let his net that he hath hid catch himself,\"\ntogether with other passages. Then, the prophet Isaiah alludes to the\nutter helplessness of a wild animal when thus taken. Isaiah li. 20,\n\"Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head of all the streets, as a\nwild bull in a net.\"\n\nAnother and more common, because an easier and a cheaper method was,\nby digging a deep pit, covering the mouth with a slight covering of\nsticks and earth, and driving the animal upon the treacherous\ncovering. It is an easier method than the net, because after the pit\nis once dug, the only trouble lies in throwing the covering over its\nmouth. But, it is not so well adapted for taking beasts alive, as they\nare likely to be damaged, either by the fall into the pit, or by the\nmeans used in getting them out again. Animals, therefore, that are\ncaught in pits are generally, though not always, killed before they\nare taken out. The net, however, envelops the animal so perfectly, and\nrenders it so helpless, that it can be easily bound and taken away.\nThe hunting net is very expensive, and requires a large staff of men\nto work it, so that none but a rich man could use the net in hunting.\n\nThe passages in which allusion is made to the use of the pitfall in\nhunting are too numerous to be quoted, and it will be sufficient to\nmention one or two passages, such as those wherein the Psalmist\nlaments that his enemies have hidden for him their net in a pit, and\nthat the proud have digged pits for him.\n\nLions that were taken in nets seem to have been kept alive in dens,\neither as mere curiosities, or as instruments of royal vengeance.\nSuch seems to have been the object of the Lions which were kept by\nDarius, into whose den Daniel was thrown, by royal command, and which\nafterwards killed his accusers when thrown into the same den. It is\nplain that the Lions kept by Darius must have been exceedingly\nnumerous, because they killed at once the accusers of Daniel, who were\nmany in number, together with their wives and children, who, in\naccordance with the cruel custom of that age and country, were\npartakers of the same punishment with the real culprits. The whole of\nthe first part of Ezek. xix. alludes to the custom of taking Lions\nalive and keeping them in durance afterwards.\n\nSometimes the Lion was hunted as a sport, but this amusement seems to\nhave been restricted to the great men, on account of its expensive\nnature. Such hunting scenes are graphically depicted in the famous\nNineveh sculptures, which represent the hunters pursuing their mighty\ngame in chariots, and destroying them with arrows. Rude, and even\nconventional as are these sculptures, they have a spirit, a force, and\na truthfulness, that prove them to have been designed by artists to\nwhom the scene was a familiar one. Nothing can be better than the\nattitudes of the Lions; and, whether they are shown in the act of\nstriking a blow, with all the talons thrust out and the toes spread as\nwidely as possible; whether they are springing on the chariot of the\nhunter, or sinking lifeless beneath his arrows, every attitude is\nmarvellously true to nature, and makes the spectator regret that the\nartist should have been trammelled by the exigencies of the work on\nwhich he was engaged.\n\n\n\n\nTHE LEOPARD.\n\n The Leopard not often mentioned in the Scriptures--its\n attributes exactly described--Probability that several animals\n were classed under the name--How the Leopard takes its\n prey--Craft of the Leopard--its ravages among the flocks--The\n empire of man over the beast--The Leopard at Bay--Localities\n wherein the Leopard lives--The skin of the Leopard--Various\n passages of Scripture explained.\n\n\nOf the Leopard but little is said in the Holy Scriptures.\n\nIn the New Testament this animal is only mentioned once, and then in a\nmetaphorical rather than a literal sense. In the Old Testament it is\ncasually mentioned seven times, and only in two places is the word\nLeopard used in the strictly literal sense. Yet, in those brief\npassages of Holy Writ, the various attributes of the animal are\ndelineated with such fidelity, that no one could doubt that the\nLeopard was familiarly known in Palestine. Its colour, its swiftness,\nits craft, its ferocity, and the nature of its dwelling-place, are all\ntouched upon in a few short sentences scattered throughout the Old\nTestament, and even its peculiar habits are alluded to in a manner\nthat proves it to have been well known at the time when the words were\nwritten.\n\nIt is my purpose in the following pages to give a brief account of the\nLeopard of the Scriptures, laying most stress on the qualities to\nwhich allusion is made, and then to explain the passages in which the\nname of the animal occurs.\n\nIn the first place, it is probable that under the word Leopard are\ncomprehended three animals, two of which, at least, were thought to be\none species until the time of Cuvier. These three animals are the\nLEOPARD proper (_Leopardus varius_), the OUNCE (_Leopardus uncia_),\nand the CHETAH, or HUNTING LEOPARD (_Gueparda jubata_). All these\nthree species belong to the same family of animals; all are spotted\nand similar in colour, all are nearly alike in shape, and all are\ninhabitants of Asia, while two of them, the Leopard and the Chetah,\nare also found in Africa.\n\nIt is scarcely necessary to mention that the Leopard is a beast of\nprey belonging to the cat tribe, that its colour is tawny, variegated\nwith rich black spots, and that it is a fierce and voracious animal,\nalmost equally dreaded by man and beast. It inhabits many parts of\nAfrica and Asia, and in those portions of the country which are\nuntenanted by mankind, it derives all its sustenance from the\nherb-eating animals of the same tracts.\n\n [Illustration: THE LEOPARD.\n\n \"_As a Leopard by the way will I observe them._\"--HOS. xiii. 7.]\n\nTo deer and antelopes it is a terrible enemy, and in spite of their\nactive limbs, seldom fails in obtaining its prey. Swift as is the\nLeopard, for a short distance, and wonderful as its spring, it has not\nthe enduring speed of the deer or antelope, animals which are\nspecially formed for running, and which, if a limb is shattered, can\nrun nearly as fast and quite as far on three legs as they can when all\nfour limbs are uninjured. Instinctively knowing its inferiority in the\nrace, the Leopard supplies by cunning the want of enduring speed.\n\nIt conceals itself in some spot whence it can see far around without\nbeing seen, and thence surveys the country. A tree is the usual spot\nselected for this purpose, and the Leopard, after climbing the trunk\nby means of its curved talons, settles itself in the fork of the\nbranches, so that its body is hidden by the boughs, and only its head\nis shown between them. With such scrupulous care does it conceal\nitself, that none but a practised hunter can discover it, while any\none who is unaccustomed to the woods cannot see the animal even when\nthe tree is pointed out to him.\n\nAs soon as the Leopard sees the deer feeding at a distance, he slips\ndown the tree and stealthily glides off in their direction. He has\nmany difficulties to overcome, because the deer are among the most\nwatchful of animals, and if the Leopard were to approach to the\nwindward, they would scent him while he was yet a mile away from them.\nIf he were to show himself but for one moment in the open ground he\nwould be seen, and if he were but to shake a branch or snap a dry twig\nhe would be heard. So, he is obliged to approach them against the\nwind, to keep himself under cover, and yet to glide so carefully along\nthat the heavy foliage of the underwood shall not be shaken, and the\ndry sticks and leaves which strew the ground shall not be broken. He\nhas also to escape the observation of certain birds and beasts which\ninhabit the woods, and which would certainly set up their alarm-cry as\nsoon as they saw him, and so give warning to the wary deer, which can\nperfectly understand a cry of alarm, from whatever animal it may\nhappen to proceed.\n\nStill, he proceeds steadily on his course, gliding from one covert to\nanother, and often expending several hours before he can proceed for a\nmile. By degrees he contrives to come tolerably close to them, and\ngenerally manages to conceal himself in some spot towards which the\ndeer are gradually feeding their way. As soon as they are near enough,\nhe collects himself for a spring, just as a cat does when she leaps on\na bird, and dashes towards the deer in a series of mighty bounds. For\na moment or two they are startled and paralysed with fear at the\nsudden appearance of their enemy, and thus give him time to get among\nthem. Singling out some particular animal, he leaps upon it, strikes\nit down with one blow of his paw, and then, crouching on the fallen\nanimal, he tears open its throat, and laps the flowing blood.\n\nIn this manner does it obtain its prey when it lives in the desert,\nbut when it happens to be in the neighbourhood of human habitations,\nit acts in a different manner. Whenever man settles himself in any\nplace, his presence is a signal for the beasts of the desert and\nforest to fly. The more timid, such as the deer and antelope, are\nafraid of him, and betake themselves as far away as possible. The more\nsavage inhabitants of the land, such as the lion, leopard, and other\nanimals, wage an unequal war against him for a time, but are\ncontinually driven farther and farther away, until at last they are\ncompletely expelled from the country. The predaceous beasts are,\nhowever, loth to retire, and do so by very slow degrees. They can no\nlonger support themselves on the deer and antelopes, but find a simple\nsubstitute for them in the flocks and herds which man introduces, and\nin the seizing of which there is as much craft required as in the\ncatching of the fleeter and wilder animals. Sheep and goats cannot run\naway like the antelopes, but they are penned so carefully within\ninclosures, and guarded so watchfully by herdsmen and dogs, that the\nLeopard is obliged to exert no small amount of cunning before it can\nobtain a meal.\n\nSometimes it creeps quietly to the fold, and escapes the notice of the\ndogs, seizes upon a sheep, and makes off with it before the alarm is\ngiven. Sometimes it hides by the wayside, and as the flock pass by it\ndashes into the midst of them, snatches up a sheep, and disappears\namong the underwood on the opposite side of the road. Sometimes it is\ncrafty enough to deprive the fold of its watchful guardian. Dogs which\nare used to Leopard-hunting never attack the animal, though they are\nrendered furious by the sound of its voice. They dash at it as if they\nmeant to devour it, but take very good care to keep out of reach of\nits terrible paws. By continually keeping the animal at bay, they give\ntime for their master to come up, and generally contrive to drive it\ninto a tree, where it can be shot.\n\nBut instances have been known where the Leopard has taken advantage of\nthe dogs, and carried them off in a very cunning manner. It hides\nitself tolerably near the fold, and then begins to growl in a low\nvoice. The dogs think that they hear a Leopard at a distance, and dash\ntowards the sound with furious barks and yells. In so doing, they are\nsure to pass by the hiding-place of the Leopard, which springs upon\nthem unawares, knocks one of them over, and bounds away to its den in\nthe woods. It does not content itself with taking sheep or goats from\nthe fold, but is also a terrible despoiler of the hen-roosts,\ndestroying great numbers in a single night when once it contrives to\nfind its way into the house.\n\nAs an instance of the cunning which seems innate in the Leopard, I may\nmention that whenever it takes up its abode near a village, it does\nnot meddle with the flocks and herds of its neighbours, but prefers to\ngo to some other village at a distance for food, thus remaining\nunsuspected almost at the very doors of the houses.\n\nIn general, it does not willingly attack mankind, and at all events\nseems rather to fear the presence of a full-grown man. But, when\nwounded or irritated, all sense of fear is lost in an overpowering\nrush of fury, and it then becomes as terrible a foe as the lion\nhimself. It is not so large nor so strong, but it is more agile and\nquicker in its movements; and when it is seized with one of these\nparoxysms of anger, the eye can scarcely follow it as it darts here\nand there, striking with lightning rapidity, and dashing at any foe\nwithin reach. Its whole shape seems to be transformed, and absolutely\nto swell with anger; its eyes flash with fiery lustre, its ears are\nthrown back on the head, and it continually utters alternate snarls\nand yells of rage. It is hardly possible to recognise the graceful,\nlithe glossy creature, whose walk is so noiseless, and whose every\nmovement is so easy, in the furious passion-swollen animal that flies\nat every foe with blind fury, and pours out sounds so fierce and\nmenacing that few men, however well armed, will care to face it.\n\nAs is the case with most of the cat tribe, the Leopard is an excellent\nclimber, and can ascend trees and traverse their boughs without the\nleast difficulty. It is so fond of trees, that it is seldom to be seen\nexcept in a well-wooded district. Its favourite residence is a forest\nwhere there is plenty of underwood, at least six or seven feet in\nheight, among which trees are sparingly interspersed. When crouched in\nthis cover it is practically invisible, even though its body may be\nwithin arm's length of a passenger. The spotted body harmonizes so\nperfectly with the broken lights and deep shadows of the foliage that\neven a practised hunter will not enter a covert in search of a Leopard\nunless he is accompanied by dogs. The instinct which teaches the\nLeopard to choose such localities is truly wonderful, and may be\ncompared with that of the tiger, which cares little for underwood, but\nhaunts the grass jungles, where the long, narrow blades harmonize with\nthe stripes which decorate its body.\n\nThe skin of the Leopard has always been highly valued on account of\nits beauty, and in Africa, at the present day, a robe made of its\nspotted skin is as much an adjunct of royalty as is the ermine the\nemblem of judicial dignity in England. In more ancient times, a\nleopard skin was the official costume of a priest, the skin being\nsometimes shaped into a garment, and sometimes thrown over the\nshoulders and the paws crossed over the breast.\n\nSuch is a general history of the Leopard. We will now proceed to the\nvarious passages in which it is mentioned, beginning with its outward\naspect.\n\nIn the first place, the Hebrew word Namer signifies \"spotted,\" and is\ngiven to the animal in allusion to its colours. The reader will now\nsee how forcible is the lament of Jeremiah, \"Can the Ethiopian change\nhis skin, or the Leopard his spots?\" Literally, \"Can the Ethiopian\nchange his skin, or the spotted one his spots?\"\n\nThe agility and swiftness of the Leopard are alluded to in the\nprediction by the prophet Habakkuk of the vengeance that would come\nupon Israel through the Chaldeans. In chap. i. 5, we read: \"I will\nwork a work in your days, which ye will not believe though it be told\nyou. For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation,\nwhich shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess the\ndwelling-places that are not theirs. They are terrible and dreadful;\ntheir judgment and their dignity shall proceed of themselves. Their\nhorses also are swifter than the Leopards, and are more fierce than\nthe evening wolves.\"\n\nThe craftiness of the Leopard, and the manner in which it lies in wait\nfor its prey, are alluded to in more than one passage of Holy Writ.\nHosea the prophet alludes to the Leopard, in a few simple words which\ndisplay an intimate acquaintance with the habits of this formidable\nanimal, and in this part of his prophecies he displays that peculiar\nlocal tone which distinguishes his writings. Speaking of the\nIsraelites under the metaphor of a flock, or a herd, he proceeds to\nsay: \"According to their pasture so were they filled; they were\nfilled, and their heart was exalted; therefore have they forgotten me.\nTherefore I will be unto them as a lion, as a Leopard by the way will\nI observe them.\" The reader will note the peculiar force of this\nsentence, whereby God signifies that He will destroy them openly, as a\nlion rushes on its prey, and that he will chastise them unexpectedly,\nas if it were a Leopard crouching by the wayside, and watching for the\nflock to pass, that it may spring on its prey unexpectedly. The same\nhabit of the Leopard is also alluded to by Jeremiah, who employs\nprecisely the same imagery as is used by Habakkuk. See Jer. v. 5, 6,\n\"These have altogether broken the yoke, and burst the bonds. Wherefore\na lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of the evenings\nshall spoil them, a leopard shall watch over their cities.\" It is\nevident from the employment of this image by two prophets, the one\nbeing nearly a hundred years before the other, that the crafty,\ninsidious habits of the Leopard were well known in Palestine, and that\nthe metaphor would tell with full force among those to whom it was\naddressed.\n\nThe havoc which the Leopard makes among the sheep and goats is alluded\nto by the prophet Isaiah, chap. xi. 6: \"The wolf also shall dwell with\nthe lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and the calf\nand the young lion together, and a little child shall lead them.\" Here\nagain we find the same imagery employed, the people being signified\nunder the metaphor of flocks and herds, and their enemies symbolised\nby lions, wolves, and Leopards. And herein the Prophet speaks as from\naccurate knowledge of the habits of the three predaceous animals. The\nwolf, as a rule, devastates the sheepfolds; the Leopard will steal\nupon and carry off the straggling goat or kid, because it can follow\nthem upon the precipices where no wolf would dare to tread; while the\nlion, being the strongest and more daring of the three, attacks the\nherds, and carries away to its lair the oxen which neither Leopard nor\nwolf could move.\n\nThere is of course a deeper meaning than has been mentioned but any\ncommentary on that subject would be out of place in a work like the\npresent, and, however tempting the subject may be to the writer, it is\nbetter that the reader should be left to investigate it for himself.\n\nLastly, the peculiar localities which the Leopard loves are mentioned\nin the Song of Solomon, chap. iv. 8: \"Come with me from Lebanon, my\nspouse, with me from Lebanon: look from the top of Amana, from the top\nof Shenir and Hermon, from the lions' dens, from the mountains of the\nleopards.\" Formerly, large forests of pine, oak, and cedar covered\nLebanon, and in those days the wild beasts of the forest would be\nextremely plentiful. Even at the present day they are not extinct, and\na recent traveller, the Rev. J. L. Porter, states that considerable\nnumbers of wild beasts still inhabit the retired glens of the range of\nLebanon, and that he himself has seen jackals, hy\u00e6nas, wolves, bears,\nand Leopards.\n\nThe remaining passages, in which a beast formed like a Leopard was\nseen in a vision by the prophet Daniel and St. John the Evangelist,\nare purely allegorical, and have nothing to do with the actual animal.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CAT.\n\n The Cat never mentioned by name in the canonical Scriptures, and\n only once in the Apocrypha--The Cat domesticated among the\n Egyptians, and trained in bird-catching--Neglected capabilities\n of the Cat--Anecdote of an English Cat that caught fish for her\n master--Presumed reason why the Scriptures are silent about the\n Cat--The Cat mentioned by Baruch.\n\n\nIt is a very remarkable circumstance that the word CAT is not once\nmentioned in the whole of the canonical Scriptures, and only once in\nthe Apocrypha.\n\nThe Egyptians, as is well known, kept Cats domesticated in their\nhouses, a fact which is mentioned by Herodotus, in his second book,\nand the 66th and 67th chapters. After describing the various animals\nwhich were kept and fed by this nation, he proceeds to narrate the\nhabits of the Cat, and writes as follows:\n\n\"When a fire takes place, a supernatural impulse seizes the cats. For\nthe Egyptians, standing at a distance, take care of the cats and\nneglect to quench the fire; but the cats make their escape, and\nleaping over the men, cast themselves into the fire, and when this\noccurs, great lamentations are made among the Egyptians. In whatever\nhouse a cat dies of a natural death, all the family shave their\neyebrows. All cats that die are carried to certain sacred houses,\nwhere, after being embalmed, they are buried in the city of Bubastis.\"\n\nNow, as many of those cat-mummies have been discovered in good\npreservation, the species has been identified with the Egyptian Cat of\nthe present day, which is scientifically termed _Felis maniculatus_.\nNot only did the Egyptians keep Cats at their houses, but, as is shown\nby certain sculptures, took the animals with them when they went\nbird-catching, and employed them in securing their prey. Some persons\nhave doubted this statement, saying, that in the first place, the Cat\nis not possessed of sufficient intelligence for the purpose; and that\nin the second place, as the hunter is represented as catching wild\nfowl, the Cat would not be able to assist him, because it would not\nenter the water. Neither objection is valid, nor would have been made\nby a naturalist.\n\nThere are no grounds whatever for assuming that the Cat has not\nsufficient intelligence to aid its master in hunting. On the contrary,\nthere are many familiar instances where the animal has been trained,\neven in this country, to catch birds and other game, and bring its\nprey home. By nature the Cat is an accomplished hunter, and, like\nother animals of the same disposition, can be taught to use its powers\nfor mankind. We all know that the chetah, a member of the same tribe,\nis in constant use at the present day, and we learn from ancient\nsculptures that the lion was employed for the same purpose. Passing\nfrom land to water, mankind has succeeded in teaching the seal and the\notter to plunge into the water, catch their finny prey, and deliver it\nto their owners. Among predaceous birds, we have trained the eagle,\nthe falcon, and various hawks, to assist us in hunting the finned and\nfeathered tribes, while we have succeeded in teaching the cormorant to\ncatch fish for its master, and not for itself. Why, then, should the\nCat be excepted from a rule so general? The fact is, the Cat has\nbeen, although domesticated for so many centuries, a comparatively\nneglected animal; and it is the fashion to heap upon it the\ncontumacious epithets of sullen, treacherous, selfish, spiteful, and\nintractable, just as we take as our emblems of stupidity the ass and\nthe goose, which are really among the most cunning of the lower\nanimals. We have never tried to teach the Cat the art of hunting for\nher owners, but that is no reason for asserting that the animal could\nnot be taught.\n\nAs to entering the water, every one who is familiar with the habits of\nthe Cat knows perfectly well that the Cat will voluntarily enter water\nin chase of prey. A Cat does not like to wet her feet, and will not\nenter the water without a very powerful reason, but when that motive\nis supplied, she has no hesitation about it. A curious and valuable\nconfirmation of this fact appeared some time ago in \"The Field\"\nnewspaper, in which was recorded the history of an old fisherman,\nwhose Cat invariably went to sea with him, and as invariably used to\nleap overboard, seize fish in her mouth, and bring them to the side of\nthe boat, where her kindly owner could lift her out, together with the\ncaptured fish.\n\nThe Cat, then, having been the favoured companion of the Egyptians,\namong whom the Israelites lived while they multiplied from a family\ninto a nation, it does seem very remarkable that the sacred writers\nshould not even mention it. There is no prohibition of the animal,\neven indirectly, in the Mosaic law; but it may be the case that the\nIsraelites repudiated the Cat simply because it was so favoured by\ntheir former masters.\n\nThe only passage in the Apocrypha is a passing allusion in Baruch (vi.\n22), where it is said of the idols, that bats and birds shall sit on\ntheir bodies, and the cats also. That the word is rightly translated\nadmits of no doubt, because it is the same that is employed by\nHerodotus in the passage already quoted.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DOG.\n\n Antipathy displayed by Orientals towards the Dog, and manifested\n throughout the Scriptures--Contrast between European and\n Oriental Dogs--Habits of the Dogs of Palestine--The City Dogs\n and their singular organization--The herdsman's Dog--Various\n passages of Scripture--Dogs and the crumbs--their\n numbers--Signor Pierotti's experience of the Dogs--Possibility\n of their perfect domestication--The peculiar humiliation of\n Lazarus--Voracity of the Wild Dogs--The fate of Ahab and\n Jezebel--Anecdote of a volunteer Watch-dog--Innate affection of\n the Dog towards mankind--Peculiar local Instinct of the Oriental\n Dog--Albert Smith's account of the Dogs at Constantinople--The\n Dervish and his Dogs--The Greyhound--Uncertainty of the word.\n\n\nScarcely changed by the lapse of centuries, the Oriental of the\npresent day retains most of the peculiarities which distinguished him\nthroughout the long series of years during which the books of sacred\nScripture were given to the world.. In many of these characteristics\nhe differs essentially from Europeans of the present day, and exhibits\na tone of mind which seems to be not merely owing to education, but to\nbe innate and inherent in the race.\n\nOne of these remarkable characteristics is the strange loathing with\nwhich he regards the Dog. In all other parts of the world, the Dog is\none of the most cherished and valued of animals, but among those\npeople whom we popularly class under the name of Orientals, the Dog is\ndetested and despised. As the sacred books were given to the world\nthrough the mediumship of Orientals, we find that this feeling towards\nthe Dog is manifested whenever the animal is mentioned; and whether we\nturn to the books of the Law, the splendid poetry of the Psalms and\nthe book of Job, the prophetical or the historical portions of the Old\nTestament, we find the name of the Dog repeatedly mentioned; and in\nevery case in connexion with some repulsive idea. If we turn from the\nOld to the New Testament, we find the same idea manifested, whether in\nthe Gospels, the Epistles, or the Revelation.\n\nTo the mind of the true Oriental the very name of the Dog carries with\nit an idea of something utterly repugnant to his nature, and he does\nnot particularly like even the thought of the animal coming across his\nmind. And this is the more extraordinary, because at the commencement\nand termination of their history the Dog was esteemed by their\nmasters. The Egyptians, under whose rule they grew to be a nation,\nknew the value of the Dog, and showed their appreciation in the many\nworks of art which have survived to our time. Then the Romans, under\nwhose iron grasp the last vestiges of nationality crumbled away,\nhonoured and respected the Dog, made it their companion, and\nintroduced its portrait into their houses. But, true to their early\ntraditions, the Jews of the East have ever held the Dog in the same\nabhorrence as is manifested by their present masters, the followers of\nMahommed.\n\nOwing to the prevalence of this feeling, the Dogs of Oriental towns\nare so unlike their more fortunate European relatives, that they can\nhardly be recognised as belonging to the same species. In those lands\nthe traveller finds that there is none of the wonderful variety which\nso distinguishes the Dog of Europe. There he will never see the bluff,\nsturdy, surly, faithful mastiff, the slight gazelle-like greyhound,\nthe sharp, intelligent terrier, the silent, courageous bulldog, the\ndeep-voiced, tawny bloodhound, the noble Newfoundland, the clever,\nvivacious poodle, or the gentle, silken-haired spaniel.\n\nAs he traverses the streets, he finds that all the dogs are alike, and\nthat all are gaunt, hungry, half starved, savage, and cowardly, more\nlike wolves than dogs, and quite as ready as wolves to attack when\nthey fancy they can do so with safety. They prowl about the streets in\ngreat numbers, living, as they best can, on any scraps of food that\nthey may happen to find. They have no particular masters, and no\nparticular homes. Charitable persons will sometimes feed them, but\nwill never make companions of them, feeling that the very contact of a\ndog would be a pollution. They are certainly useful animals, because\nthey act as scavengers, and will eat almost any animal substance that\ncomes in their way.\n\nThe strangest part of their character is the organization which\nprevails among them. By some extraordinary means they divide the town\ninto districts, and not one dog ever ventures out of that particular\ndistrict to which it is attached. The boundaries, although invisible,\nare as effectual as the loftiest walls, and not even the daintiest\nmorsel will tempt a dog to pass the mysterious line which forms the\nboundary of his district. Generally, these bands of dogs are so savage\nthat any one who is obliged to walk in a district where the dogs do\nnot know him is forced to carry a stout stick for his protection. Like\ntheir European relatives, they have great dislike towards persons who\nare dressed after a fashion to which they are unaccustomed, and\ntherefore are sure to harass any one who comes from Europe and wears\nthe costume of his own country. As is customary among animals which\nunite themselves in troops, each band is under the command of a single\nleader, whose position is recognised and his authority acknowledged by\nall the members.\n\nThese peculiarities are to be seen almost exclusively in the dogs\nwhich run wild about the towns, because there is abundant evidence in\nthe Scriptures that the animal was used in a partially domesticated\nstate, certainly for the protection of their herds, and possibly for\nthe guardianship of their houses. That the Dog was employed for the\nfirst of these purposes is shown in Job xxx. 1: \"But now they that are\nyounger than I have me in derision, whose fathers I would have\ndisdained to have set with the dogs of my flock.\" And that the animal\nwas used for the protection of houses is thought by some commentators\nto be shown by the well-known passage in Is. lvi. 10: \"His watchmen\nare blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot\nbark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber.\" Still, it is very\nprobable that in this passage the reference is not made to houses, but\nto the flocks and herds which these watchmen ought to have guarded.\n\nThe rooted dislike and contempt felt by the Israelites towards the Dog\nis seen in numerous passages. Even in that sentence from Job which has\njust been quoted, wherein the writer passionately deplores the low\ncondition into which he has fallen, and contrasts it with his former\nhigh estate, he complains that he is despised by those whose fathers\nhe held even in less esteem than the dogs which guarded his herds.\nThere are several references to the Dog in the books of Samuel, in all\nof which the name of the animal is mentioned contemptuously. For\nexample, when David accepted the challenge of Goliath, and went to\nmeet his gigantic enemy without the ordinary protection of mail, and\narmed only with a sling and his shepherd's staff, Goliath said to him,\n\"Am I a dog, that thou comest to me with staves?\" (1 Sam. xvii. 43.)\nAnd in the same book, chapter xxiv. 14, David remonstrates with Saul\nfor pursuing so insignificant a person as himself, and said, \"After\nwhom is the King of Israel come out? after a dead dog, after a flea.\"\n\nThe same metaphor is recorded in the second book of the same writer.\nOnce it was employed by Mephibosheth, the lame son of Jonathan, when\nextolling the generosity of David, then King of Israel in the place of\nhis grandfather Saul: \"And he bowed himself, and said, 'What is thy\nservant, that thou shouldest look upon such a dead dog as I am?\" (2\nSam. ix. 8.) In the same book, chapter xvi. 9, Abishai applies this\ncontemptuous epithet to Shimei, who was exulting over the troubled\nmonarch with all the insolence of a cowardly nature, \"Why should this\ndead dog curse my lord the king?\" Abner also makes use of a similar\nexpression, \"Am I a dog's head?\" And we may also refer to the familiar\npassage in 2 Kings viii. 13. Elisha had prophesied to Hazael that he\nwould become king on the death of Ben-hadad, and that he would work\nterrible mischief in the land. Horrified at these predictions, or at\nall events pretending to be so, he replied, \"But what, is thy servant\na dog, that he should do this great thing?\"\n\nIf we turn from the Old to the New Testament, we find the same\ncontemptuous feeling displayed towards the Dog. It is mentioned as an\nintolerable aggravation of the sufferings endured by Lazarus the\nbeggar as he lay at the rich man's gate, that the dogs came and licked\nhis sores. In several passages, the word Dog is employed as a metaphor\nfor scoffers, or unclean persons, or sometimes for those who did not\nbelong to the Church, whether Jewish or Christian. In the Sermon on\nthe Mount our Lord himself uses this image, \"Give not that which is\nholy unto dogs\" (Matt. vii. 6.) In the same book, chapter xv. 26,\nJesus employs the same metaphor when speaking to the Canaanitish woman\nwho had come to ask him to heal her daughter: \"It is not meet to take\nthe children's bread and cast it to dogs.\" And that she understood the\nmeaning of the words is evident from her answer, in which faith and\nhumility are so admirably blended. Both St. Paul and St. John employ\nthe word Dog in the same sense. In his epistle to the Philippians,\nchapter iii. 2, St. Paul writes, \"Beware of dogs, beware of evil\nworkers.\" And in the Revelation, chapter xxii. 14, these words occur:\n\"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right\nto the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates to the city;\nfor without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers,\nand idolaters, and whomsoever loveth and maketh a lie.\"\n\nThat the dogs of ancient times formed themselves into bands just as\nthey do at present is evident from many passages of Scripture, among\nwhich may be mentioned those sentences from the Psalms, wherein David\nis comparing the assaults of his enemies to the attacks of the dogs\nwhich infested the city. \"Thou hast brought me into the dust of death;\nfor dogs have compassed me, the assembly of the wicked have enclosed\nme.\" This passage will be better appreciated when the reader has\nperused the following extract from a recent work by Signor Pierotti.\nAfter giving a general account of the Dogs of Palestine and their\ncustoms, he proceeds as follows:--\n\n\"In Jerusalem, and in the other towns, the dogs have an organization\nof their own. They are divided into families and districts, especially\nin the night time, and no one of them ventures to quit his proper\nquarter; for if he does, he is immediately attacked by all the\ndenizens of that into which he intrudes, and is driven back, with\nseveral bites as a reminder. Therefore, when an European is walking\nthrough Jerusalem by night, he is always followed by a number of\ncanine attendants, and greeted at every step with growls and howls.\nThese tokens of dislike, however, are not intended for him, but for\nhis followers, who are availing themselves of his escort to pass\nunmolested from one quarter to another.\n\n\"During the hard winter of 1859, I fed many of the dogs, who\nfrequented the road which I traversed almost every evening, and\nafterwards, each time that I passed, I received the homage not only of\nthe individuals, but of the whole band to which they belonged, for\nthey accompanied me to the limits of their respective jurisdictions\nand were ready to follow me to my own house, if I did but give them a\nsign of encouragement, coming at my beck from any distance. They even\nrecollected the signal in 1861, though it was but little that I had\ngiven them.\"\n\nThe account which this experienced writer gives of the animal presents\na singular mixture of repulsive and pleasing traits, the latter being\nattributable to the true nature of the Dog, and the former to the\nutter neglect with which it is treated. He remarks that the dogs which\nrun wild in the cities of Palestine are ill-favoured, ill-scented, and\nill-conditioned beasts, more like jackals or wolves than dogs, and\ncovered with scars, which betoken their quarelsome nature. Yet, the\nsame animals lose their wild, savage disposition, as soon as any human\nbeing endeavours to establish that relationship which was evidently\nintended to exist between man and the dog. How readily even these\ndespised and neglected animals respond to the slightest advance, has\nbeen already shown by Sig. Pierotti's experience, and there is no\ndoubt that these tawny, short-haired, wolf-like animals, could be\ntrained as perfectly as their more favoured brethren of the western\nworld.\n\nAs in the olden times, so at the present day, the dogs lie about in\nthe streets, dependent for their livelihood upon the offal that is\nflung into the roads, or upon the chance morsels that may be thrown to\nthem. An allusion to this custom is made in the well-known passage in\nMatt. xv. The reader will remember the circumstance that a woman of\nCanaan, and therefore not an Israelite, came to Jesus, and begged him\nto heal her daughter, who was vexed with a devil. Then, to try her\nfaith, He said, \"It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to\ncast it to dogs.\" And she said, \"Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the\ncrumbs which fall from their master's table.\" Now, the \"crumbs\" which\nare here mentioned are the broken pieces of bread which were used at\ntable, much as bread is sometimes used in eating fish. The form of the\n\"loaves\" being flat, and much like that of the oat-cake of this\ncountry, adapted them well to the purpose. The same use of broken\nbread is alluded to in the parable of Lazarus, who desired to be fed\nwith the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table, _i.e._ to partake\nof the same food as the dogs which swarmed round him and licked his\nsores. Thus we see that Lazarus was supposed to have undergone the\nvery worst indignities to which poverty could bring a man, and the\ncontrast between himself and the other personage of the parable\nreceives additional strength.\n\nThe \"crumbs,\" however liberally distributed, would not nearly suffice\nfor the subsistence of the canine armies, and their chief support\nconsists of the offal, which is rather too plentifully flung into the\nstreets. The Dogs of Palestine are, indeed, much like hy\u00e6nas of\ncertain African towns, and act as scavengers, devouring any animal\nsubstance that may fall in their way. If the body of any animal, not\nexcluding their own kind, be found lying in the streets, the dogs will\nassemble round it, and tear it to pieces, and they have no scruples\neven in devouring a human body. Of course, owing to the peculiar\nfeeling entertained by the Orientals towards the Dog, no fate can be\nimagined more repulsive to the feelings of humanity than to be eaten\nby dogs; and therein lies the terror of the fate which was prophesied\nof Ahab and Jezebel. Moreover, the blood, even of the lower animals,\nwas held in great sanctity, and it was in those days hardly possible\nto invoke a more dreadful fate upon any one than that his blood should\nbe lapped by dogs.\n\nWe lose much of the real force of the Scriptures, if we do not possess\nsome notion of the manners and customs of Palestine and the\nneighbouring countries, as well as of the tone of mind prevalent among\nthe inhabitants. In our own country, that any one should be eaten by\ndogs would be a fate so contrary to usage, that we can hardly conceive\nits possibility, and such a fate would be out of the ordinary course\nof events. But, if such a fate should happen to befall any one, we\nshould have no stronger feeling of pity than the natural regret that\nthe dead person was not buried with Christian rites.\n\nBut, with the inhabitants of Palestine, such an event was by no means\nunlikely. It was, and is still, the custom to bury the corpse almost\nas soon as life has departed, and such would ordinarily have been the\ncase with the dead body of Jezebel. But, through fear of the merciless\nJehu, by whose command she had been flung from the window of her own\npalace, no one dared to remove her mangled body. The dogs, therefore,\nseized upon their prey; and, even before Jehu had risen from the\nbanquet with which he celebrated his deed, nothing was left of the\nbody but the skull, the feet, and the hands.\n\nIn Mr. Tristram's work, the author has recognised the true dog nature,\nthough concealed behind an uninviting form: \"Our watch-dog, Beir\u00fbt,\nattached himself instinctively to Wilhelm, though his canine instinct\nsoon taught him to recognise every one of our party of fourteen, and\nto cling to the tents, whether in motion or at rest, as his home. Poor\nBeir\u00fbt! though the veriest pariah in appearance, thy plebeian form\nencased as noble a dog-heart as ever beat at the sound of a stealthy\nstep.\"\n\nThe same author records a very remarkable example of the sagacity of\nthe native Dog, and the fidelity with which it will keep guard over\nthe property of its master. \"The guard-house provided us, unasked,\nwith an invaluable and vigilant sentry, who was never relieved, nor\never quitted the post of duty. The poor Turkish conscript, like every\nother soldier in the world, is fond of pets, and in front of the grim\nturret that served for a guard-house was a collection of old\norange-boxes and crates, thickly peopled with a garrison of dogs of\nlow degree, whose attachment to the spot was certainly not purchased\nby the loaves and fishes which fell to their lot.\n\n\"One of the family must indeed have had hard times, for she had a\nfamily of no less than five dependent on her exertions, and on the\nsuperfluities of the sentries' mess. With a sagacity almost more than\ncanine, the poor gaunt creature had scarcely seen our tents pitched\nbefore she came over with all her litter and deposited them in front\nof our tent. At once she scanned the features of every member of the\nencampment, and introduced herself to our notice. During the week of\nour stay, she never quitted her post, or attempted any depredation on\nour kitchen-tent, which might have led to her banishment. Night and\nday she proved a faithful and vigilant sentry, permitting no stranger,\nhuman or canine, European or Oriental, to approach the tents without\npermission, but keeping on the most familiar terms with ourselves and\nour servants.\n\n\"On the morning of our departure, no sooner had she seen our camp\nstruck, than she conveyed her puppies back to their old quarters in\nthe orange-box, and no intreaties or bribes could induce her to\naccompany us. On three subsequent visits to Jerusalem, the same dog\nacted in a similar way, though no longer embarrassed by family cares,\nand would on no account permit any strange dog, nor even her\ncompanions at the guard-house, to approach within the tent ropes.\"\n\nAfter perusing this account of the Dog of Palestine, two points strike\nthe reader. The first is the manner in which the Dog, in spite of all\nthe social disadvantages under which it labours, displays one of the\nchief characteristics of canine nature, namely, the yearning after\nhuman society. The animal in question had already attached herself to\nthe guard-house, where she could meet with some sort of human\nconverse, though the inborn prejudices of the Moslem would prevent the\nsoldiers from inviting her to associate with them, as would certainly\nhave been done by European soldiers. She nestled undisturbed in the\norange-box, and, safe under the protection of the guard, brought up\nher young family in their immediate neighbourhood. But, as soon as\nEuropeans arrived, her instinct told her that they would be closer\nassociates than the Turkish soldiers who were quartered in the\nguard-house, and accordingly she removed herself and her family to the\nshelter of their tents.\n\nHerein she carried out the leading principle of a dog's nature. A dog\n_must_ have a master, or at all events a mistress, and just in\nproportion as he is free from human control, does he become less\ndog-like and more wolf-like. In fact, familiar intercourse with\nmankind is an essential part of a dogs true character, and the animal\nseems to be so well aware of this fact, that he will always contrive\nto find a master of some sort, and will endure a life of cruel\ntreatment at the hands of a brutal owner rather than have no master at\nall.\n\nThe second point in this account is the singular local instinct which\ncharacterises the Dogs of Palestine and other eastern countries, and\nwhich is as much inbred in them as the faculty of marking game in the\npointer, the combative nature in the bulldog, the exquisite scent in\nthe bloodhound, and the love of water in the Newfoundland dog. In\nEngland, we fancy that the love of locality belongs especially to the\ncat, and that the Dog cares little for place, and much for man. But,\nin this case, we find that the local instinct overpowered the yearning\nfor human society. Fond as was this dog of her newly-found friends,\nand faithful as she was in her self-imposed service, she would not\nfollow them away from the spot where she had been born, and where she\nhad produced her own young.\n\nThis curious love for locality has evidently been derived from the\ntraditional custom of successive generations, which has passed from\nthe realm of reason into that of instinct. The reader will remember\nthat Sig. Pierotti mentions an instance where the dogs which he had\nbeen accustomed to feed would follow him as far as the limits of\ntheir particular district, but would go no farther. The late Albert\nSmith, in his \"Month at Constantinople,\" gives a similar example of\nthis characteristic. He first describes the general habits of the\ndogs.\n\nOn the first night of his arrival, he could not sleep, and went to the\nwindow to look out in the night. \"The noise I heard then I shall never\nforget. To say that if all the sheep-dogs, in going to Smithfield on a\nmarket-day, had been kept on the constant bark, and pitted against the\nyelping curs upon all the carts in London, they could have given any\nidea of the canine uproar that now first astonished me, would be to\nmake the feeblest of images. The whole city rang with one vast riot.\nDown below me, at Tophan\u00e9--over-about Stamboul--far away at\nScutari--the whole sixty thousand dogs that are said to overrun\nConstantinople appeared engaged in the most active extermination of\neach other, without a moment's cessation. The yelping, howling,\nbarking, growling, and snarling, were all merged into one uniform and\ncontinuous even sound, as the noise of frogs becomes when heard at a\ndistance. For hours there was no lull. I went to sleep, and woke\nagain, and still, with my windows open, I heard the same tumult going\non; nor was it until daybreak that anything like tranquillity was\nrestored.\n\n\"Going out in the daytime, it is not difficult to find traces of the\nfights of the night about the limbs of all the street dogs. There is\nnot one, among their vast number, in the possession of a perfect skin.\nSome have their ears gnawed away or pulled off; others have their eyes\ntaken out; from the backs and haunches of others perfect steaks of\nflesh had been torn away; and all bear the scars of desperate combats.\n\n [Illustration: \"At evening let them return; and let them make a noise\n like a dog, and go round about the city. Let them wander up and down\n for meat, and grudge if they be not satisfied\"--PSALM lix. 14, 15.]\n\n\"Wild and desperate as is their nature, these poor animals are\nsusceptible of kindness. If a scrap of bread is thrown to one of them\nnow and then, he does not forget it; for they have, at times, a hard\nmatter to live--not the dogs amongst the shops of Galata or Stamboul,\nbut those whose 'parish' lies in the large burying-grounds and desert\nplaces without the city; for each keeps, or rather is kept, to his\ndistrict, and if he chanced to venture into a strange one, the odds\nagainst his return would be very large. One battered old animal, to\nwhom I used occasionally to toss a scrap of food, always followed\nme from the hotel to the cross street in Pera, where the two\nsoldiers stood on guard, but would never come beyond this point.\nHe knew the fate that awaited him had he done so; and therefore,\nwhen I left him, he would lie down in the road, and go to sleep\nuntil I came back.\n\n\"When a horse or camel dies, and is left about the roads near the\ncity, the bones are soon picked very clean by these dogs, and they\nwill carry the skulls or pelves to great distances. I was told that\nthey will eat their dead fellows--a curious fact, I believe, in canine\neconomy. They are always troublesome, not to say dangerous, at night;\nand are especially irritated by Europeans, whom they will single out\namongst a crowd of Levantines.\"\n\nIn the same work there is a short description of a solitary dervish,\nwho had made his home in the hollow of a large plane-tree, in front of\nwhich he sat, surrounded by a small fence of stakes only a foot or so\nin height. Around him, but not venturing within the fence, were a\nnumber of gaunt, half-starved dogs, who prowled about him in hopes of\nhaving an occasional morsel of food thrown to them. Solitary as he\nwas, and scanty as must have been the nourishment which he could\nafford to them, the innate trustfulness of the dog-nature induced them\nto attach themselves to human society of some sort, though their\nmaster was one, and they were many--he was poor, and they were hungry.\n\nOnce in the Scriptures the word Greyhound occurs, namely, in Prov.\nxxx. 29-31: \"There be three things which go well, yea, four are comely\nin going: a lion, which is strongest among beasts, and turneth not\naway for any; a greyhound; an he-goat also; and a king, against whom\nthere is no rising up.\" But the word \"Greyhound\" is only employed\nconjecturally, inasmuch as the signification of the Hebrew word\n_Zarzir-mathn\u00e2im_ is \"one girt about the loins.\" Some commentators\nhave thought that the horse might be signified by this word, and that\nthe girding about the loins referred to the trappings with which all\nEasterns love to decorate their steeds. Probably, however, the word in\nquestion refers neither to a horse nor a dog, but to a human athlete,\nor wrestler, stripped, and girt about the loins ready for the contest.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE WOLF.\n\n Identity of the animal indisputable--its numbers, past and\n present--The Wolf never mentioned directly--its general\n habits--References in Scripture--its mingled ferocity and\n cowardice--its association into packs--The Wolf's bite--How it\n takes its prey--its ravages among the flocks--Allusions to this\n habit--The shepherd and his nightly enemies--Mr. Tristram and\n the Wolf--A semi-tamed Wolf at Marsaba.\n\n\nThere is no doubt that the Hebrew word _Ze\u00ebb_, which occurs in a few\npassages of the Old Testament, is rightly translated as WOLF, and\nsignifies the same animal as is frequently mentioned in the New\nTestament.\n\nThis fierce and dangerous animal was formerly very plentiful in\nPalestine, but is now much less common, owing to the same causes which\nhave extirpated the lion from the country. It is a rather remarkable\nfact, that in no passage of Holy Writ is the Wolf directly mentioned.\nIts name is used as a symbol of a fierce and treacherous enemy, but\nneither in the Old nor New Testament does any sacred writer mention\nany act as performed by the Wolf. We have already heard of the lion\nwhich attacked Samson and was killed by him, of the lion which slew\nthe disobedient prophet, and of the lions which spared Daniel when\nthrown into their den. We also read of the dogs which licked Ahab's\nblood, and ate the body of Jezebel, also of the bears which tore the\nmocking children.\n\nBut in no case is the Wolf mentioned, except in a metaphorical sense;\nand this fact is the more remarkable, because the animals were so\nnumerous that they were very likely to have exercised some influence\non a history extending over such a lengthened range of years, and\nlimited to so small a portion of the earth. Yet we never hear of the\nWolf attacking any of the personages mentioned in Scripture; and\nalthough we are told of the exploit of David, who pursued a lion and a\nbear that had taken a lamb out of his fold, we are never told of any\nsimilar deed in connexion with the Wolf.\n\n [Illustration: THE WOLF.\n\n \"_The wolf catcheth and scattereth the sheep_\"--JOHN x. 12.]\n\nThis animal was then what it is now. Seldom seen by day, it lies\nhidden in its covert as long as the light lasts, and steals out in\nsearch of prey in the evening. This custom of the Wolf is mentioned in\nseveral passages of Holy Scripture, such as that in Jer. v. 5, 6:\n\"These have altogether broken the yoke, and burst the bonds. Wherefore\na lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of the evenings\nshall spoil them.\" In this passage the reader will see that the\nrebellious Israelites are compared to restive draught cattle which\nhave broken away from their harness and run loose, so that they are\ndeprived of the protection of their owners, and exposed to the fury of\nwild beasts. A similar reference is made in Hab. i. 8: \"Their horses\nalso are swifter than the leopards, and are more fierce than the\nevening wolves.\" The same habit of the Wolf is alluded to in Zeph.\niii. 3: \"Her princes within her are roaring lions; her judges are\nevening wolves.\"\n\nIndividually, the Wolf is rather a timid animal. It will avoid a man\nrather than meet him. It prefers to steal upon its prey and take it\nunawares, rather than to seize it openly and boldly. It is ever\nsuspicious of treachery, and is always imagining that a trap is laid\nfor it. Even the shallow device of a few yards of rope trailing from\nany object, or a strip of cloth fluttering in the breeze, is quite\nsufficient to keep the Wolf at bay for a considerable time. This fact\nis well known to hunters, who are accustomed to secure the body of a\nslain deer by simply tying a strip of cloth to its horn. If taken in a\ntrap of any kind, or even if it fancies itself in an enclosure from\nwhich it can find no egress, it loses all courage, and will submit to\nbe killed without offering the least resistance. It will occasionally\nendeavour to effect its escape by feigning death, and has more than\nonce been known to succeed in this device.\n\nBut, collectively, the Wolf is one of the most dangerous animals that\ncan be found. Herding together in droves when pressed by hunger, the\nwolves will openly hunt prey, performing this task as perfectly as a\npack of trained hounds. Full of wiles themselves, they are craftily\nwise in anticipating the wiles of the animals which they pursue; and\neven in full chase, while the body of the pack is following on the\nfootsteps of the flying animal, one or two are detached on the flanks,\nso as to cut it off if it should attempt to escape by doubling on its\npursuers.\n\nThere is no animal which a herd of wolves will not attack, and very\nfew which they will not ultimately secure. Strength avails nothing\nagainst the numbers of these savage foes, which give no moment of\nrest, but incessantly assail their antagonist, dashing by instinct at\nthose parts of the body which can be least protected, and lacerating\nwith their peculiar short, snapping bite. Should several of their\nnumber be killed or disabled, it makes no difference to the wolves,\nexcept that a minute or two are wasted in devouring their slain or\nwounded brethren, and they only return to the attack the more excited\nby the taste of blood. Swiftness of foot avails nothing against the\ntireless perseverance of the wolves, who press on in their peculiar,\nlong, slinging gallop, and in the end are sure to tire out the swifter\nfooted but less enduring animal that flees before them. The stately\nbuffalo is conquered by the ceaseless assaults of the wolves; the bear\nhas been forced to succumb to them, and the fleet-footed stag finds\nhis swift limbs powerless to escape the pursuing band, and his\nbranching horns unable to resist their furious onset when once they\novertake him.\n\nIn the passage from Habakkuk which has already been quoted, allusion\nis made to the ferocity of the Wolf, and the same characteristic is\nmentioned in several other parts of Scripture. Take, for example, Gen.\nxlix. 27: \"Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall\ndevour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil.\" Or the\npassage in Ezekiel xxii. 27: \"Her princes in the midst thereof are\nlike wolves ravening the prey, to shed blood.\" Or the well-known\nmetaphor of our Lord in Matt. vii. 15: \"Beware of false prophets,\nwhich come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening\nwolves.\"\n\nThat the Wolf is a special enemy to the sheep-fold is shown in many\nparts of the Scriptures, both in the Old and New Testaments,\nespecially in the latter. In John x. 1-16, Jesus compares himself to a\ngood shepherd, who watches over the fold, and, if the wolves should\ncome to take the sheep, would rather give up His life than they should\nsucceed. But the false teachers are compared to bad shepherds, hired\nfor money, but having no interest in the sheep, and who therefore will\nnot expose themselves to danger in defence of their charge.\n\nThis metaphor was far more effective in Palestine, and at that time,\nthan it is in this country and at the present day. In this land, the\nshepherd has no anxiety about the inroads of wild beasts, but in\nPalestine one of his chief cares was to keep watch at night lest the\nwolves should attack the fold, and to drive them away himself in case\nthey should do so. Therefore the shepherd's life was one which\ninvolved no small danger as well as anxiety, and the metaphor used by\nour Lord gains additional force from the knowledge of this fact.\n\nA similar metaphor is used when Jesus wished to express in forcible\nterms the dangers to which the chosen seventy would oft be subjected,\nand the impossibility that they should be able to overcome the many\nperils with which they would be surrounded. \"Go your ways: behold, I\nsend you forth as lambs among wolves\" (Luke x. 3).\n\nThe well-known fact of the ravages of wolves among sheep has been\nemployed by the prophet Isaiah in two passages, wherein he foretells\nthe peaceful state of the world when the kingdom of the Messiah shall\nhave been established: \"The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and\nthe leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young\nlion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them\"\n(Is. xi. 6). The second passage occurs in chapter lxv. 23-25, and is\nof a similar character: \"They shall not labour in vain, nor bring\nforth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord,\nand their offspring with them. And it shall come to pass, that before\nthey call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will\nhear. The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall\neat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They\nshall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the Lord.\"\n\nMr. Tristram several times met wolves while he was engaged in his\ntravels, and mostly saw solitary specimens. One such encounter took\nplace in the wilderness of Judah: \"On my way back, I met a fine\nsolitary wolf, who watched me very coolly, at the distance of sixty\nyards, while I drew my charge and dropped a bullet down the barrel.\nThough I sent the ball into a rock between his legs as he stood\nlooking at me in the wady, he was not sufficiently alarmed to do more\nthan move on a little more quickly, ever and anon turning to look at\nme, while gradually increasing his distance. Darkness compelled me to\ndesist from the chase, when he quietly turned and followed me at a\nrespectful distance. He was a magnificent animal, larger than any\nEuropean wolf, and of a much lighter colour.\"\n\nThose who are acquainted with the character of the animal will\nappreciate the truthfulness of this description. The cautious prowl at\na distance, the slow trot away when he fancied he might be attacked,\nthe reverted look, and the final turning back and following at a\nrespectful distance, are all characteristic traits of the Wolf, no\nmatter to what species it may belong, nor what country it may inhabit.\n\nOn another occasion, while riding in the open plain of Gennesaret, the\nhorse leaped over the bank of a little ditch, barely three feet in\ndepth. After the horse had passed, and not until then, a Wolf started\nout of the ditch, literally from under the horse's hoofs, and ran off.\nThe animal had been crouching under the little bank, evidently\nwatching for some cows and calves which were grazing at a short\ndistance, under the charge of a Bedouin boy. The same author mentions\nthat one of the monks belonging to the monastery at Marsaba had\ncontrived to render a Wolf almost tame. Every evening at six o'clock\nthe Wolf came regularly across the ravine, had a piece of bread, and\nthen went back again. With the peculiar jealousy of all tamed animals,\nthe Wolf would not suffer any of his companions to partake of his good\nfortune. Several of them would sometimes accompany him, but as soon as\nthey came under the wall of the monastery he always drove them away.\n\nThe inhabitants of Palestine say that the Wolves of that country are\nnot gregarious, and that they hunt singly, or at most in little packs\nof few in number. Still they dread the animal exceedingly, and say\nthat one Wolf will do more damage in a flock of sheep than a whole\npack of jackals.\n\nAs a general rule, the Syrian wolf, like the Syrian bear, is of a\nlighter colour than its European relatives, and appears to be a larger\nand stronger animal.\n\n\n\n\nTHE FOX OR JACKAL.\n\n The two animals comprehended under one name--The Jackal--its\n numbers in ancient and modern Palestine--General habits of the\n Jackal--Localities where the Jackal is found--Samson, and the\n three hundred \"foxes\"--Popular objections to the narrative--The\n required number easily obtained--Signor Pierotti's remarks upon\n the Jackal--An unpleasant position--How the fields were set on\n fire--The dread of fire inherent in wild beasts--The truth of\n the narrative proved--The Fox and Jackal destructive among\n grapes--Allusions to the Fox in the New Testament--Partially\n tamed Foxes.\n\n\nThere are several passages in the Old Testament in which the word FOX\noccurs, and it is almost certain that the Hebrew word _Shu\u00e2l_, which\nis rendered in our translation as Fox, is used rather loosely, and\nrefers in some places to the Jackal, and in others to the Fox. We\nwill first take those passages in which the former rendering of the\nword is evidently the right one, and will begin by examining those\ncharacteristics of the animal which afford grounds for such an\nassertion.\n\n [Illustration: THE FOX OR JACKAL.\n\n \"_They shall be a portion for foxes._\"--PSALM ixiii. 10. _The end of\n the Scape Goat._]\n\nEven at the present time, the Jackal is extremely plentiful in\nPalestine; and as the numbers of wild beasts have much decreased in\nmodern days, the animals must have been even more numerous than they\nare at present. It is an essentially nocturnal and gregarious animal.\nDuring the whole of the day the Jackals lie concealed in their holes\nor hiding-places, which are usually cavities in the rocks, in tombs,\nor among ruins. At nightfall they issue from their dens, and form\nthemselves into packs, often consisting of several hundred\nindividuals, and prowl about in search of food. Carrion of various\nkinds forms their chief subsistence, and they perform in the country\nmuch the same task as is fulfilled by the dogs in the cities.\n\nIf any animal should be killed, or even severely wounded, the Jackals\nare sure to find it out and to devour it before the daybreak. They\nwill scent out the track of the hunter, and feed upon the offal of the\nbeasts which he has slain. If the body of a human being were to be\nleft on the ground, the Jackals would certainly leave but little\ntraces of it; and in the olden times of warfare, they must have held\nhigh revelry in the battle-field after the armies had retired. It is\nto this propensity of the Jackal that David refers--himself a man of\nwar, who had fought on many a battle-field, and must have seen the\ncarcases of the slain mangled by these nocturnal prowlers: \"Those that\nseek my soul, to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the\nearth. They shall fall by the sword; they shall be a portion for\nfoxes\" (Ps. lxiii. 9, 10). Being wild beasts, afraid of man, and too\ncowardly to attack him even when rendered furious by hunger, and\npowerful by force of numbers, they keep aloof from towns and cities,\nand live in the uninhabited parts of the country. Therefore the\nprophet Jeremiah, in his Book of Lamentations, makes use of the\nfollowing forcible image, when deploring the pitiful state into which\nJud\u00e6a had fallen: \"For this our heart is faint; for these things our\neyes are dim: because of the mountain of Zion, which is desolate, the\nfoxes walk upon it\" (Lam. v. 17). And Ezekiel makes use of a similar\nimage: \"O Israel, thy prophets are like foxes in the desert.\"\n\nBut, by far the most important passage in which the Fox is mentioned,\nis that wherein is recorded the grotesque vengeance of Samson upon the\nPhilistines: \"And Samson went and caught three hundred foxes, and took\nfirebrands, and turned tail to tail, and put a firebrand in the midst\nbetween two tails. And when he had set the brands on fire, he let them\ngo into the standing corn of the Philistines, and burnt up both the\nshocks and also the standing corn, with the vineyards and olives\"\n(Judges xv. 4, 5). Now, as this is one of the passages of Holy Writ to\nwhich great objections have been taken, it will be as well to examine\nthese objections, and see whether they have any real force. The first\nof these objections is, that the number of foxes is far too great to\nhave been caught at one time, and to this objection two answers have\nbeen given. The first answer is, that they need not have been caught\nat once, but by degrees, and kept until wanted. But the general tenor\nof the narrative is undoubtedly in favour of the supposition that this\nact of Samson was unpremeditated, and that it was carried into\noperation at once, before his anger had cooled. The second answer is,\nthat the requisite number of Foxes might have been miraculously sent\nto Samson for this special purpose. This theory is really so foolish\nand utterly untenable, that I only mention it because it has been put\nforward. It fails on two grounds: the first being that a miracle would\nhardly have been wrought to enable Samson to revenge himself in so\ncruel and unjustifiable a manner; and the second, that there was not\nthe least necessity for any miracle at all.\n\nIf we put out of our minds the idea of the English Fox, an animal\ncomparatively scarce in this country, and solitary in its habits, and\nsubstitute the extremely plentiful and gregarious Jackal, wandering in\ntroops by night, and easily decoyed by hunger into a trap, we shall\nsee that double the number might have been taken, if needful.\nMoreover, it is not to be imagined that Samson caught them all with\nhis own hand. He was at the head of his people, and had many\nsubordinates at his command, so that a large number of hunters might\nhave been employed simultaneously in the capture. In corroboration of\nthis point, I insert an extremely valuable extract from Signor\nPierotti's work, in which he makes reference to this very portion of\nthe sacred history:--\n\n\"It is still very abundant near Gaza, Askalon, Ashdod, Ekron, and\nRamleh. I have frequently met with it during my wanderings by night,\nand on one occasion had an excellent opportunity of appreciating their\nnumber and their noise.\n\n\"One evening in the month of January 1857, while it was raining a\nperfect deluge, I was obliged, owing to the dangerous illness of a\nfriend, to return from Jerusalem to Jaffa. The depth of snow on the\nroad over a great part of the mountain, the clayey mud in the plain,\nand the darkness of the night, prevented my advancing quickly; so that\nabout half-past three in the morning I arrived on the bank of a small\ntorrent, about half an hour's journey to the east of Ramleh. I wished\nto cross: my horse at first refused, but, on my spurring it, advanced\nand at once sank up to the breast, followed of course by my legs,\nthus teaching me to respect the instinct of an Arab horse for the\nfuture.\n\n\"There I stuck, without the possibility of escape, and consoled my\nhorse and myself with some provisions that I had in my saddle-bags,\nshouting and singing at intervals, in the hope of obtaining succour,\nand of preventing accidents, as I knew that the year before a mule in\nthe same position had been mistaken for a wild beast, and killed. The\ndarkness was profound, and the wind very high; but, happily, it was\nnot cold; for the only things attracted by my calls were numbers of\njackals, who remained at a certain distance from me, and responded to\nmy cries, especially when I tried to imitate them, as though they took\nme for their music-master.\n\n\"About five o'clock, one of the guards of the English consulate at\nJerusalem came from Ramleh and discovered my state. He charitably\nreturned thither, and brought some men, who extricated me and my horse\nfrom our unpleasant bath, which, as may be supposed, was not\nbeneficial to our legs.\n\n\"During this most uncomfortable night, I had good opportunity of\nascertaining that, if another Samson had wished to burn again the\ncrops in the country of the Philistines, he would have had no\ndifficulty in finding more than three hundred jackals, and catching as\nmany as he wanted in springs, traps, or pitfalls. (See Ps. cxl. 5.)\"\n\nThe reader will now see that there was not the least difficulty in\nprocuring the requisite number of animals, and that consequently the\nfirst objection to the truth of the story is disposed of.\n\nWe will now proceed to the second objection, which is, that if the\nanimals were tied tail to tail, they would remain on or near the same\nspot, because they would pull in different directions, and that,\nrather than run about, they would turn round and fight each other.\nNow, in the first place, we are nowhere told that the tails of the\nfoxes, or jackals, were placed in contact with each other, and it is\nprobable that some little space was left between them. That animals so\ntied would not run in a straight line is evident enough, and this was\nexactly the effect which Samson wished to produce. Had they been at\nliberty, and the fiery brand fastened to their tails, they would have\nrun straight to their dens, and produced but little effect. But their\ncaptor, with cruel ingenuity, had foreseen this contingency, and, by\nthe method of securing them which he adopted, forced them to pursue a\ndevious course, each animal trying to escape from the dreaded\nfirebrand, and struggling in vain endeavours to drag its companion\ntowards its own particular den.\n\nAll wild animals have an instinctive dread of fire; and there is none,\nnot even the fierce and courageous lion, that dares enter within the\nglare of the bivouac fire. A lion has even been struck in the face\nwith a burning brand, and has not ventured to attack the man that\nwielded so dreadful a weapon. Consequently it may be imagined that the\nunfortunate animals that were used by Samson for his vindictive\npurpose, must have been filled with terror at the burning brands which\nthey dragged after them, and the blaze of the fire which was kindled\nwherever they went. They would have no leisure to fight, and would\nonly think of escaping from the dread and unintelligible enemy which\npursued them.\n\nWhen a prairie takes fire, all the wild inhabitants flee in terror,\nand never think of attacking each other, so that the bear, the wolf,\nthe cougar, the deer, and the wild swine, may all be seen huddled\ntogether, their natural antagonism quelled in the presence of a common\nfoe. So it must have been with the miserable animals which were made\nthe unconscious instruments of destruction. That they would stand\nstill when a burning brand was between them, and when flames sprang up\naround them, is absurd. That they would pull in exactly opposite\ndirections with precisely balanced force is equally improbable, and it\nis therefore evident that they would pursue a devious path, the\nstronger of the two dragging the weaker, but being jerked out of a\nstraight course and impeded by the resistance which it would offer.\nThat they would stand on the same spot and fight has been shown to be\ncontrary to the custom of animals under similar circumstances.\n\nThus it will be seen that every objection not only falls to the\nground, but carries its own refutation, thus vindicating this episode\nin sacred history, and showing, that not only were the circumstances\npossible, but that they were highly probable. Of course every one of\nthe wretched animals must have been ultimately burned to death, after\nsuffering a prolonged torture from the firebrand that was attached to\nit. Such a consideration would, however, have had no effect for\ndeterring Samson from employing them. The Orientals are never sparing\nof pain, even when inflicted upon human beings, and in too many cases\nthey seem utterly unable even to comprehend the cruelty of which they\nare guilty. And Samson was by no means a favourable specimen of his\ncountrymen. He was the very incarnation of strength, but was as\nmorally weak as he was corporeally powerful; and to that weakness he\nowed his fall. Neither does he seem to possess the least trace of\nforbearance any more than of self-control, but he yields to his own\nundisciplined nature, places himself, and through him the whole\nIsraelitish nation, in jeopardy, and then, with a grim humour,\nscatters destruction on every side in revenge for the troubles which\nhe has brought upon himself by his own acts.\n\nThere is a passage in the Old Testament which is tolerably familiar to\nmost students of the Scriptures: \"Take us the foxes, the little foxes,\nthat spoil the vines, for our vines have tender grapes\" (Solomon's\nSong, ii. 15). In this passage allusion is made to the peculiar\nfondness for grapes and several other fruits which exist both in the\nFox and the Jackal. Even the domesticated dog is often fond of ripe\nfruits, and will make great havoc among the gooseberry bushes and the\nstrawberry beds. But both the Fox and the Jackal display a wonderful\npredilection for the grape above all other fruit, and even when\nconfined and partly tamed, it is scarcely possible to please them\nbetter than by offering them a bunch of perfectly ripe grapes. The\nwell-known fable of the fox and the grapes will occur to the mind of\nevery one who reads the passage which has just been quoted.\n\nThere are two instances in the New Testament where the Fox is\nmentioned, and in both cases the allusion is made by the Lord himself.\nThe first of these passages is the touching and well-known reproach,\n\"The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the\nSon of Man hath not where to lay his head\" (Matt. viii. 20). The\nsecond passage is that in which He speaks of Herod as \"that fox,\"\nselecting a term which well expressed the character of the cruel and\ncunning ruler to whom it was applied.\n\nThe reader will remember that, in the history of the last-mentioned\nanimal an anecdote is told of a semi-tamed wolf that used to come\nevery evening for the purpose of receiving a piece of bread. At the\nsame monastery, three foxes used to enjoy a similar privilege. They\ncame regularly to the appointed place, which was not that which the\nwolf frequented, and used to howl until their expected meal was given\nto them. Several companions generally accompanied them, but were\nalways jealously driven away before the monks appeared with the bread.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HY\u00c6NA.\n\n The Hy\u00e6na not mentioned by name, but evidently alluded\n to--Signification of the word Zabua--Translated in the\n Septuagint as Hy\u00e6na--A scene described by the Prophet\n Isaiah--The Hy\u00e6na plentiful in Palestine at the present day--its\n well-known cowardice and fear of man--The uses of the Hy\u00e6na and\n the services which it renders--The particular species of\n Hy\u00e6na--The Hy\u00e6na in the burial-grounds--Hunting the\n Hy\u00e6na--Curious superstition respecting the talismanic properties\n of its skin--Precautions adopted in flaying it--Popular legends\n of the Hy\u00e6na and its magical powers--The cavern home of the\n Hy\u00e6na--The Valley of Zeboim.\n\n\nAlthough in our version of the Scriptures the Hy\u00e6na is not mentioned\nby that name, there are two passages in the Old Testament which\nevidently refer to that animal, and therefore it is described in these\npages. If the reader will refer to the prophet Jeremiah, xii. 7-9, he\nwill find these words: \"I have forsaken mine house, I have left mine\nheritage; I have given the dearly beloved of my soul into the hand of\nher enemies. Mine heritage is unto me as a lion in the forest; it\ncrieth out against me: therefore have I hated it. Mine heritage is\nunto me as a speckled bird; the birds round about are against her:\ncome ye, assemble all the beasts of the field, come to devour.\" Now,\nthe word _zabua_ signifies something that is streaked, and in the\nAuthorized Version it is rendered as a speckled bird. But in the\nSeptuagint it is rendered as Hy\u00e6na, and this translation is thought by\nmany critical writers to be the true one. It is certain that the word\n_zabua_ is one of the four names by which the Talmudical writers\nmention the Hy\u00e6na, when treating of its character; and it is equally\ncertain that such a rendering makes the passage more forcible, and is\nin perfect accordance with the habits of predacious animals.\n\nThe whole scene which the Prophet thus describes was evidently\nfamiliar to him. First, we have the image of a deserted country,\nallowed to be overrun with wild beasts. Then we have the lion, which\nhas struck down its prey, roaring with exultation, and defying any\nadversary to take it from him. Then, the lion having eaten his fill\nand gone away, we have the Hy\u00e6nas, vultures, and other carrion-eating\ncreatures, assembling around the carcase, and hastening to devour it.\nThis is a scene which has been witnessed by many hunters who have\npursued their sport in lands where lions, hy\u00e6nas, and vultures are\nfound; and all these creatures were inhabitants of Palestine at the\ntime when Jeremiah wrote.\n\nAt the present day, the Hy\u00e6na is still plentiful in Palestine, though\nin the course of the last few years its numbers have sensibly\ndiminished. The solitary traveller, when passing by night from one\ntown to another, often falls in with the Hy\u00e6na, but need suffer no\nfear, as it will not attack a human being, and prefers to slink out of\nhis way. But dead, and dying, or wounded animals are the objects for\nwhich it searches; and when it finds them, it devours the whole of its\nprey. The lion will strike down an antelope, an ox, or a goat--will\ntear off its flesh with its long fangs, and lick the bones with its\nrough tongue until they are quite cleaned. The wolves and jackals will\nfollow the lion, and eat every soft portion of the dead animal, while\nthe vultures will fight with them for the coveted morsels. But the\nHy\u00e6na is a more accomplished scavenger than lion, wolf, jackal, or\nvulture; for it will eat the very bones themselves, its\ntremendously-powerful jaws and firmly-set teeth enabling it to crush\neven the leg-bone of an ox, and its unparalleled digestive powers\nenabling it to assimilate the sharp and hard fragments which would\nkill any creature not constituted like itself.\n\nIn a wild, or even a partially-inhabited country, the Hy\u00e6na is,\ntherefore, a most useful animal. It may occasionally kill a crippled\nor weakly ox, and sometimes carry off a sheep; but, even in that case,\nno very great harm is done, for it does not meddle with any animal\nthat can resist. But these few delinquencies are more than compensated\nby the great services which it renders as scavenger, consuming those\nsubstances which even the lion cannot eat, and thus acting as a\nscavenger in removing objects which would be offensive to sight and\ninjurious to health.\n\nThe species which is mentioned in the Scriptures is the Striped Hy\u00e6na\n(_Hy\u00e6na striata_); but the habits of all the species are almost\nexactly similar. We are told by travellers of certain towns in\ndifferent parts of Africa which would be unendurable but for the\nHy\u00e6nas. With the disregard for human life which prevails throughout\nall savage portions of that country, the rulers of these towns order\nexecutions almost daily, the bodies of the victims being allowed to\nlie where they happened to fall. No one chooses to touch them, lest\nthey should also be added to the list of victims, and the decomposing\nbodies would soon cause a pestilence but for the Hy\u00e6nas, who assemble\nat night round the bodies, and by the next morning have left scarcely\na trace of the murdered men.\n\nEven in Palestine, and in the present day, the Hy\u00e6na will endeavour to\nrifle the grave, and to drag out the interred corpse. The bodies of\nthe rich are buried in rocky caves, whose entrances are closed with\nheavy stones, which the Hy\u00e6na cannot move; but those of the poor,\nwhich are buried in the ground, must be defended by stones heaped over\nthem. Even when this precaution is taken, the Hy\u00e6na will sometimes\nfind out a weak spot, drag out the body, and devour it.\n\nIn consequence of this propensity, the inhabitants have an utter\ndetestation of the animal. They catch it whenever they can, in\npitfalls or snares, using precisely the same means as were employed\ntwo thousand years ago; or they hunt it to its den, and then kill it,\nstripping off the hide, and carrying it about still wet, receiving a\nsmall sum of money from those to whom they show it. Afterwards the\nskin is dressed, by rubbing it with lime and salt, and steeping it in\nthe waters of the Dead Sea. It is then made into sandals and leggings,\nwhich are thought to be powerful charms, and to defend the wearer from\nthe Hy\u00e6na's bite.\n\n [Illustration: THE HY\u00c6NA.\n\n \"_I have given thee for meat to the beasts of the field and to the\n fowls of the heaven._\"--EZEK. xxix. 5.]\n\nThey always observe certain superstitious precautions in flaying the\ndead animal. Believing that the scent of the flesh would corrupt the\nair, they invariably take the carcase to the leeward of the tents\nbefore they strip off the skin. Even in the animal which has been kept\nfor years in a cage, and has eaten nothing but fresh meat, the odour\nis too powerful to be agreeable, as I can testify from practical\nexperience when dissecting a Hy\u00e6na that had died in the Zoological\nGardens; and it is evident that the scent of an animal that has lived\nall its life on carrion must be almost unbearable. The skin being\nremoved, the carcase is burnt, because the hunters think that by this\nprocess the other Hy\u00e6nas are prevented from finding the body of their\ncomrade, and either avenging its death or taking warning by its fate.\n\nSuperstitions seem to be singularly prevalent concerning the Hy\u00e6na. In\nPalestine, there is a prevalent idea that if a Hy\u00e6na meets a solitary\nman at night, it can enchant him in such a manner as to make him\nfollow it through thickets and over rocks, until he is quite\nexhausted, and falls an unresisting prey; but that over two persons he\nhas no such influence, and therefore a solitary traveller is gravely\nadvised to call for help as soon as he sees a Hy\u00e6na, because the\nfascination of the beast would be neutralized by the presence of a\nsecond person. So firmly is this idea rooted in the minds of the\ninhabitants, that they will never travel by night, unless they can\nfind at least one companion in their journey.\n\nIn Northern Africa there are many strange superstitions connected with\nthis animal, one of the most curious of which is founded on its\nwell-known cowardice. The Arabs fancy that any weapon which has killed\na Hy\u00e6na, whether it be gun, sword, spear, or dagger, is thenceforth\nunfit to be used in warfare. \"Throw away that sword,\" said an Arab to\na French officer, who had killed a Hy\u00e6na, \"it has slain the Hy\u00e6na, and\nit will be treacherous to you.\"\n\nAt the present day, its numbers are not nearly so great in Palestine\nas they used to be, and are decreasing annually. The cause of this\ndiminution lies, according to Signor Pierotti, more in the destruction\nof forests than in the increase of population and the use of\nfire-arms, though the two latter causes have undoubtedly considerable\ninfluence.\n\nThere is a very interesting account by Mr. Tristram of the haunt of\nthese animals. While exploring the deserted quarries of Es Sumrah,\nbetween Beth-arabah and Bethel, he came upon a wonderful mass of\nhy\u00e6nine relics. The quarries in which were lying the half-hewn blocks,\nscored with the marks of wedges, had evidently formed the resort of\nHy\u00e6nas for a long series of years. \"Vast heaps of bones of camels,\noxen, and sheep had been collected by these animals, in some places to\nthe depth of two or three feet, and on one spot I counted the skulls\nof seven camels. There were no traces whatever of any human remains.\nWe had here a beautiful recent illustration of the mode of foundation\nof the old bone caverns, so valuable to the geologist. These bones\nmust all have been brought in by the Hy\u00e6nas, as no camel or sheep\ncould possibly have entered the caverns alive, nor could any floods\nhave washed them in. Near the entrance where the water percolates,\nthey were already forming a soft breccia.\"\n\nThe second allusion to the Hy\u00e6na is made in 1 Sam. xiii. 18, \"Another\ncompany turned to the way of the border that looketh to the Valley of\nZeboim towards the wilderness,\" _i.e._ to the Valley of Hy\u00e6nas.\n\nThe colour of the Striped Hy\u00e6na varies according to its age. When\nyoung, as is the case with many creatures, birds as well as mammals,\nthe stripes from which it derives its name are much more strongly\nmarked than in the adult specimen. The general hue of the fur is a\npale grey-brown, over which are drawn a number of dark stripes,\nextending along the ribs and across the limbs.\n\nIn the young animal these stripes are nearly twice as dark and twice\nas wide as in the adult, and they likewise appear on the face and on\nother parts of the body, whence they afterwards vanish. The fur is\nalways rough; and along the spine, and especially over the neck and\nshoulders, it is developed into a kind of mane, which gives a very\nfierce aspect to the animal. The illustration shows a group of Hy\u00e6nas\ncoming to feed on the relics of a dead animal. The jackals and\nvultures have eaten as much of the flesh as they can manage, and the\nvultures are sitting, gorged, round the stripped bones. The Hy\u00e6nas are\nnow coming up to play their part as scavengers, and have already begun\nto break up the bones in their crushing-mills of jaws.\n\n\n\n\nTHE WEASEL.\n\n Difficulty of identifying the Weasel of Scripture--The Weasel of\n Palestine--Suggested identity with the Ichneumon.\n\n\nThe word Weasel occurs once in the Holy Scriptures, and therefore it\nis necessary that the animal should be mentioned. There is a great\ncontroversy respecting the identification of the animal, inasmuch as\nthere is nothing in the context which gives the slightest indication\nof its appearance or habits.\n\nThe passage in question is that which prohibits the Weasel and the\nmouse as unclean animals (see Lev. xi. 29). Now the word which is here\ntranslated Weasel is _Choled_, or _Chol'd_; and, I believe, never\noccurs again in the whole of the Old Testament. Mr. W. Houghton\nconjectures that the Hebrew word Choled is identical with the Arabic\n_Chuld_ and the Syriac _Chuldo_, both words signifying a mole; and\ntherefore infers that the unclean animal in question is not a Weasel,\nbut a kind of mole.\n\nThe Weasel does exist in Palestine, and seems to be as plentiful there\nas in our own country. Indeed, the whole tribe of Weasels is well\nrepresented, and the polecat is seen there as well as the Weasel.\n\nIt has been suggested with much probability, that, as is clearly the\ncase in many instances, several animals have been included in the\ngeneral term Weasel, and that among them may be reckoned the common\nichneumon (_Herpestes_), which is one of the most plentiful of animals\nin Palestine, and which may be met daily.\n\nThe Septuagint favours the interpretation of Weasel, and, as there is\nno evidence on either side, there we may allow the question to rest.\nAs, however, the word only occurs once, and as the animal, whatever it\nmay be, is evidently of no particular importance, we may reserve our\nspace for the animals which have more important bearings upon the Holy\nScriptures. The subject will be again mentioned in the account of the\nMole of the Old Testament.\n\n\n\n\nTHE FERRET.\n\n Translation of the Hebrew word _Anakah_--The Shrew-mouse of\n Palestine--Etymology of the word--The Gecko or Fan-foot, its\n habits and peculiar cry--Repugnance felt by the Arabs of the\n present day towards the Gecko.\n\n\nWhy the Hebrew word _Anakah_ should have been translated in our\nversion as Ferret there is little ground for conjecture.\n\nThe name occurs among the various creeping things that were reckoned\nas unclean, and were prohibited as food (see Lev. xi. 29, 30): \"These\nalso shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creepeth\nupon the earth: the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his\nkind, and the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the\nsnail, and the mole.\" Now the word in question is translated in the\nSeptuagint as the Mygale, or Shrew-mouse, and it is probable that this\nanimal was accepted by the Jews as the Anakah. But, whether or not it\nwas the Shrew-mouse, it is certain that it is not the animal which we\ncall the Ferret. Mr. Tristram suggests that the etymology of the name,\n_i.e._ An\u00e2kah, the Groaner, or Sigher, points to some creature which\nutters a mournful cry. And as the animal in question is classed among\nthe creeping things, he offers a conjecture that the Gecko,\nWall-lizard, or Fan-foot, may be the true interpretation of the word.\n\nBeing one of the lizards, it belongs to the \"creeping things,\" and\nfrequently utters a mournful sound like the word \"geck-o.\" It is\nexceedingly plentiful, and inhabits the interior of houses, where it\ncan find the flies and other insects on which it lives. On account of\nthe structure of the toes, each of which is flattened into a disk-like\nform, and furnished on the under surface with a series of plates like\nthose on the back of the sucking-fish, it can walk up a smooth,\nperpendicular wall with perfect ease, and can even cling to the\nceiling like the flies on which it feeds.\n\nThe structure of the feet enables it to move about without the least\nsound, and at first an observer is apt to be rather startled at the\nmournful cry, and at the silent rapidity with which it darts from\nplace to place.\n\nThe Arabs of the present day are horribly afraid of the Gecko,\nthinking that it poisons everything that it touches, and are even more\nterrified than are ignorant people in England when they see a toad.\nBoth creatures are equally repulsive in aspect, and equally harmless\ntowards the human race.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BADGER.\n\n Difficulty in identifying the _Tachash_ of Scripture--References\n to \"Badgers' skins\"--The Dugong thought to be the Badger--The\n Bedouin sandals--Nature of the materials for the\n Tabernacle--Habits of the Badger--The species found in\n Palestine--Uses of the Badgers' skins--Looseness of zoological\n terms.\n\n\nUntil very lately, there was much difficulty in ascertaining whether\nthe word _Tachash_ has been rightly translated as Badger. It occurs in\nseveral parts of the Scriptures, and almost invariably is used in\nrelation to a skin or fur of some sort. We will first examine the\npassages in which the Badger is mentioned, and then proceed to\nidentify the animal.\n\nNearly all the references to the Badger occur in the book of Exodus,\nand form part of the directions for constructing the Tabernacle and\nits contents. The first notice of the word occurs in Exodus xxv. 5,\nwhere the people of Israel are ordered to bring their offerings for\nthe sanctuary, among which offerings are gold, silver, and brass,\nblue, purple, and scarlet, fine linen, goats' hair, rams' skins dyed\nred, badgers' skins, and shittim wood--all these to be used in the\nconstruction of the Tabernacle. Then a little farther on, in chapter\nxxvi. 14, we find one of the special uses to which the badgers' skins\nwere to be put, namely, to make the outer covering or roof of the\ntabernacle. Another use for the badgers' skins was to form an outer\ncovering for the ark, table of shewbread, and other furniture of the\nTabernacle, when the people were on the march.\n\nIn all these cases the badger-skin is used as a covering to defend a\nbuilding or costly furniture, but there is one example where it is\nemployed for a different purpose. This passage occurs in the book of\nEzekiel, chapter xvi. 10. The prophet is speaking of Jerusalem under\nthe image of a woman, and uses these words, \"I anointed thee with oil;\nI clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod thee with badger's\nskin, and I girded thee about with fine linen, and I covered thee with\nsilk. I decked thee also with ornaments, and I put bracelets upon thy\nhands, and a chain upon thy neck, and I put a jewel on thy forehead,\nand earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head.\"\n\nSo we have here the fact, that the same material which was used for\nthe covering of the Tabernacle, and of the sacred furniture, could\nalso be used for the manufacture of shoes. This passage is the more\nvaluable because of an inference which may be drawn from it. The\nreader will see that the badger-skin, whatever it may have been, must\nhave been something of considerable value, and therefore, in all\nprobability, something of much rarity.\n\nIn the present instance, it is classed with the most luxurious robes\nthat were known in those days, and it is worthy of special mention\namong the bracelet, earrings, necklace, and coronal with which the\nsymbolized city was adorned. If the reader will now refer to the\npassage in which the children of Israel were commanded to bring their\nofferings, he will see that in those cases also the badger-skins were\nranked with the costliest articles of apparel that could be found, and\nhad evidently been brought from Egypt, the peculiar home of all the\narts; together with the vast quantity of gold and jewels which were\nused for the same sacred purpose.\n\nNow we find that the badger-skins in question must possess three\nqualities: they must be costly, they must be capable of forming a\ndefence against the weather, and they must be strong enough to be\nemployed in the manufacture of shoes. If we accept the word Tachash as\nsignifying a Badger, we shall find that these conditions have been\nfulfilled.\n\nBut many commentators have thought that badger-skins could not have\nbeen procured in sufficient numbers for the purpose, and have\ntherefore conjectured that some other animal must be signified by the\nword Tachash.\n\nA species of dugong (_Halicore hemprichii_) is the animal that has\nbeen selected as the Badger of the Scriptures. It is one of the marine\nmammalia, and always lives near the shore, where it can find the\nvarious alg\u00e6 on which it feeds. It is a gregarious animal, and, as it\nfrequently ascends rivers for some distance, it may be captured in\nsufficient numbers to make both its flesh and skin useful. Moreover,\nit is of considerable size, fourteen or fifteen feet in length being\nits usual dimensions, so that a comparatively small number of the\nskins would be required for the covering of the Tabernacle.\n\nThat shoes can be made of it is evident from the fact that at the\npresent day shoes, or rather sandals, are made from its hide, and are\ncommonly used by the Bedouins. But the very qualities and\npeculiarities which render it a fit material for the sandal of a\nhalf-naked Bedouin Arab, who has to walk continually over hard, hot,\nsandy, and rough ground, would surely make it unsuitable for the\ndelicate shoes worn by a woman of rank who spends her time in the\nhouse, and the rest of whose clothing is of fine linen and silk,\nembroidered with gold and jewels. In our own country, the hobnailed\nshoes of the ploughman and the slight shoe of a lady are made of very\ndifferent materials, and it is reasonable to conjecture that such was\nthe case when the passage in question was written.\n\n [Illustration: THE BADGER.\n\n \"Thou shalt make a covering above of badgers' skins.\"--EX. xxvi. 14.]\n\nThen Dr. Robinson, who admits that the hide of the dugong could hardly\nhave been used as the material for a lady's shoe, thinks that it would\nhave answered very well for the roof of the Tabernacle, because it was\nlarge, clumsy, and coarse. It seems strange that he did not also\nperceive that the two latter qualities would completely disqualify\nsuch skins for that service. Everything clumsy and coarse was\nstudiously prohibited, and nothing but the very best was considered\nfit for the Tabernacle of the Lord. By special revelation, Moses was\ninstructed to procure, not merely the ordinary timber of the country\nfor the framework--not only the fabrics which would keep out rain and\nwind--not simply the metals in common use, from which to make the\nlamps and other furniture--not the ordinary oils for supplying the\nlamps; but, on the contrary, the finest linen, the most elaborate\nembroidery, the rarest woods, the purest gold, the costliest\ngems, were demanded, and nothing common or inferior was accepted.\nThe commonest material that was permitted was the long, soft\nfleece of rams' wool; but, even in that case, the wool had to be dyed\nof the regal scarlet--a dye so rare and so costly that none but the\nwealthiest rulers could use it. Even the very oil that burned in the\nlamps must be the purest olive-oil, prepared expressly for that\npurpose.\n\nThe very fact, therefore, that any article was plentiful and could\neasily be obtained, would be a proof that such article was not used\nfor so sacred a purpose; while it is impossible that anything coarse\nand clumsy could have been accepted for the construction of that\nTabernacle within which the Shekinah ever burned over the\nMercy-seat--over which the cloud rested by day, and the fire shone by\nnight, visible external proofs of the Divine glory within.\n\nWe therefore dismiss from our minds the possibility of accepting any\nmaterial for it which was not exceptionably valuable, and which would\nbe employed in the uses of ordinary life. The great object of the\nminutely-elaborate directions which were given through Moses to the\nIsraelites was evidently to keep continually before their eyes the\ngreat truth that they owed all to God, and that their costliest\nofferings were but acknowledgments of their dependence.\n\nWe will now presume that the Tachash of the Pentateuch and Ezekiel is\nreally the animal which we know by the name of Badger. It exists\nthroughout the whole of the district traversed by the Israelites,\nthough it is not very plentiful, nor is it easily taken. Had such been\nthe case, its fur would not have been employed in the service of the\nsanctuary.\n\nIt is nocturnal in its habits, and very seldom is seen during the\nhours of daylight, so that it cannot be captured by chase. It is not\ngregarious, so that it cannot be taken in great numbers, as is the\ncase with certain wild animals which have been thought to be the\nTachash of Scripture. It is not a careless animal, so that it cannot\nbe captured or killed without the exercise of considerable ingenuity,\nand the expenditure of much time and trouble. It is one of the\nburrowing animals, digging for itself a deep subterranean home, and\nalways ready whenever it is alarmed to escape into the dark recesses\nof its dwelling, from which it can scarcely be dislodged. It is not a\nlarge animal, so that a considerable number of skins would be required\nin order to make a covering which should overlap a structure\nforty-five feet in length and fifteen in breadth. Were it a solitary\nanimal, there might be a difficulty in procuring a sufficient number\nof skins. But it is partly gregarious in its habits, living together\nin small families, seven or eight being sometimes found to inhabit a\nsingle dwelling-place. It is, therefore, sufficiently rare to make its\nskin valuable, and sufficiently plentiful to furnish the requisite\nnumber of skins. All these facts tend to show that the cost of such a\ncovering must have been very great, even though it was the outermost,\nand, consequently, the least valuable of the four. It has been\nsuggested that these skins were only used to lay over the lines where\nthe different sets of coverings overlapped each other, and that, in\nconsequence, they need not have been very numerous.\n\nBut we find that these same skins, which were evidently those which\nformed the external roof, were used, when the Tabernacle was taken\ndown, for the purpose of forming distinct coverings for the ark of the\ntestimony, the table of shewbread, the seven-branched candlestick, the\ngolden altar, the various vessels used in the ministrations, and\nlastly, the altar of sacrifice itself. Thus, when we recollect the\ndimensions of the ark, the table, the candlestick, and the two altars,\nwe shall see that, in order to make separate covers for them, a\nquantity of material would be used which would be amply sufficient to\ncover the whole roof of the Tabernacle, even if it had, as was most\nprobably the case, a ridged, and not a flat roof.\n\nWe now come to our next point, namely, the aptitude of the Badger's\nskin to resist weather. Any one who has handled the skin of the Badger\nwill acknowledge that a better material could hardly be found. The fur\nis long, thick, and, though light, is moderately stiff, the hairs\nfalling over each other in such a manner as to throw off rain or snow\nas off a penthouse. And, as to the third point, namely, its possible\nuse as a material for the manufacture of shoes, we may call to mind\nthat the skin of the Badger is proverbially tough, and that this very\nquality has caused the animal to be subjected to most cruel treatment\nby a class of sporting men which is now almost extinct.\n\nThe Septuagint gives little assistance in determining the precise\nnature of the Tachash, and rather seems to consider the word as\nexpressive of the colour with which the fur was dyed than that of the\nanimal from which it was taken. Still, it must be remembered that not\nonly are zoological terms used very loosely in the Scriptures, but\nthat in Hebrew, as in all other languages, the same combination of\nletters often expresses two different ideas, so that the word Tachash\nmay equally signify a colour and an animal. Moreover, it has been well\npointed out that the repeated use of the word in the plural number\nshows that it cannot refer to colour; while its almost invariable\ncombination with the Hebrew word that signifies a skin implies that it\ndoes not refer to colour, but to an animal.\n\nWhat that animal may be, is, as I have already mentioned, conjectural.\nBut, as the authorized translation renders the word as Badger, and as\nthis reading fulfils the conditions necessary to its identification,\nand as no other reading does fulfil them, we cannot be very far wrong\nif we accept that translation as the correct one, and assume the\nTachash of the Scriptures to be the animal which we call by the name\nof Badger.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BEAR.\n\n The Syrian Bear--Identity of the Hebrew and Arabic titles--Its\n colour variable according to age--Bears once numerous in\n Palestine, and now only occasionally seen--Reason for their\n diminution--Present localities of the Bear, and its favourite\n haunts--Food of the Bear--Its general habits--Its ravages among\n the flocks--The Bear dangerous to mankind--The Bear robbed of\n her whelps--Illustrative passages--Its mode of fighting--Various\n references to the Bear, from the time of Samuel to that of St.\n John.\n\n\nWhatever doubt may exist as to the precise identity of various animals\nmentioned in the Scriptures, there is none whatever as to the creature\nwhich is frequently alluded to under the name of Bear.\n\nThe Hebrew word is _D\u00f4b_, and it is a remarkable fact that the name of\nthis animal in the Arabic language is almost identical with the Hebrew\nterm, namely, _Dubh_. The peculiar species of Bear which inhabits\nPalestine is the Syrian Bear (_Ursus Isabellinus_), and, though it has\nbeen variously described by different eye-witnesses, there is no doubt\nthat the same species was seen by them all. As is the case with many\nanimals, the Syrian Bear changes its colour as it grows older. When a\ncub, it is of a darkish brown, which becomes a light brown as it\napproaches maturity. But, when it has attained its full growth, it\nbecomes cream-coloured, and each succeeding year seems to lighten its\ncoat, so that a very old Bear is nearly as white as its relative of\nthe Arctic regions. Travellers, therefore, who have met the younger\nspecimens, have described them as brown in hue, while those who have\nseen more aged individuals have stated that the colour of the Syrian\nBear is white.\n\nOwing to the destruction of forests, the Bear, which is essentially a\nlover of the woods, has decreased considerably in number. Yet, even at\nthe present time, specimens may be seen by the watchful traveller,\nmostly about the range of Lebanon, but sometimes at a considerable\ndistance from that locality. Mr. Tristram, for example, saw it close\nto the Lake of Gennesaret. \"We never met with so many wild animals as\non one of those days. First of all, a wild boar got out of some scrub\nclose to us, as we were ascending the valley. Then a deer was started\nbelow, ran up the cliff, and wound along the ledge, passing close to\nus. Then a large ichneumon almost crossed my feet and ran into a\ncleft; and, while endeavouring to trace him, I was amazed to see a\nbrown Syrian Bear clumsily but rapidly clamber down the rocks and\ncross the ravine. He was, however, far too cautious to get within\nhailing distance of any of the riflemen.\"\n\n [Illustration: \"As a roaring lion and a ranging bear, so is a wicked\n ruler over the poor people.\"--PROV. xxviii. 15.]\n\nThe same author mentions that some of the chief strongholds of this\nBear are certain clefts in the face of a precipitous chasm through\nwhich the river Leontes flows. This river runs into the sea a few\nmiles northward of Tyre, and assists in carrying off the melted snows\nfrom the Lebanon range of mountains. His description is so\npicturesque, that it must be given in his own words. \"The channel,\nthough a thousand feet deep, was so narrow that the opposite ridge was\nwithin gunshot. Looking down the giddy abyss, we could see the cliff\non our side partially covered with myrtle, bay, and caper\nhanging from the fissures, while the opposite side was perforated\nwith many shallow caves, the inaccessible eyries of vultures,\neagles, and lanner falcons, which were sailing in multitudes\naround. The lower part had many ledges clad with shrubs, the\nstrongholds of the Syrian Bear, though inaccessible even to goats. Far\nbeneath dashed the milk-white river, a silver line in a ruby setting\nof oleanders, roaring doubtless fiercely, but too distant to be heard\nat the height on which we stood. This _cleft_ of the Leontes was the\nonly true Alpine scenery we had met with in Palestine, and in any\ncountry, and amidst any mountains, it would attract admiration.\"\n\nOn those elevated spots the Bear loves to dwell, and throughout the\nsummer-time generally remains in such localities. For the Bear is one\nof the omnivorous animals, and is able to feed on vegetable as well as\nanimal substances, preferring the former when they can be found. There\nis nothing that a Bear likes better than strawberries and similar\nfruits, among which it will revel throughout the whole fruit season,\ndaintily picking the ripest berries, and becoming wonderfully fat by\nthe constant banquet. Sometimes, when the fruits fail, it makes\nincursions among the cultivated grounds, and is noted for the ravages\nwhich it makes among a sort of vetch which is much grown in the Holy\nLand.\n\nBut during the colder months of the year the Bear changes its diet,\nand becomes carnivorous. Sometimes it contents itself with the various\nwild animals which it can secure, but sometimes it descends to the\nlower plains, and seizes upon the goats and sheep in their pastures.\nThis habit is referred to by David, in his well-known speech to Saul,\nwhen the king was trying to dissuade him from matching himself against\nthe gigantic Philistine. \"And Saul said to David, Thou art not able to\ngo against this Philistine to fight with him: for thou art but a\nyouth, and he a man of war from his youth.... Thy servant kept his\nfather's sheep, and there came a lion and a bear, and took a lamb out\nof the flock: and I went out after him, and smote him, and delivered\nit out of his hand; and when he arose against me, I caught him by the\nbeard, and smote him, and slew him. Thy servant slew both the lion and\nthe bear: and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them,\nseeing he hath defied the armies of the living God.\"--1 Sam. xvii.\n33-36.\n\nThough not generally apt to attack mankind, it will do so if first\nattacked, and then becomes a most dangerous enemy. See, for example,\nthat most graphic passage in the book of the prophet Amos, whose\nbusiness as a herdsman must have made him conversant with the habits,\nnot only of the flocks and herds which he kept, but of the wild beasts\nwhich might devour them:--\"Woe unto you that desire the day of the\nLord! to what end is it for you? the day of the Lord is darkness, and\nnot light. As if a man did flee from a lion, and a bear met him; or\nwent into a house, and leaned his hand on the wall, and a serpent bit\nhim.\" (v. 19.)\n\nAnother reference to the dangerous character of the Bear is made in 2\nKings ii. 23, 24, in which is recorded that two she-bears came out of\nthe wood near Bethel, and killed forty-two of the children that mocked\nat Elisha.\n\nAs the Bear is not swift of foot, but rather clumsy in its movements,\nit cannot hope to take the nimbler animals in open chase. It prefers\nto lie in wait for them in the bushes, and to strike them down with a\nsudden blow of its paw, a terrible weapon, which it can wield as\neffectively as the lion uses its claws. An allusion to this habit is\nmade in the Lamentations of Jeremiah (iii. 10), \"He was unto me as a\nbear lying in wait, and as a lion in secret places.\"\n\nHarmless to man as it generally is, there are occasions on which it\nbecomes a terrible and relentless foe, not seeking to avoid his\npresence, but even searching for him, and attacking him as soon as\nseen. In the proper season of the year, hunters, or those who are\ntravelling through those parts of the country infested by the Bear,\nwill sometimes find the cubs, generally two in number, their mother\nhaving left them in the den while she has gone to search for food.\nAlthough they would not venture to take the initiative in an attack\nupon either of the parents, they are glad of an opportunity which\nenables them to destroy one or two Bears without danger to themselves.\nThe young Bears are easily killed or carried off, because at a very\nearly age they are as confident as they are weak, and do not try to\nescape when they see the hunters approaching.\n\nThe only danger lies in the possibility that their deed may be\ndiscovered by the mother before they can escape from the locality,\nand, if she should happen to return while the robbers are still in\nthe neighbourhood, a severe conflict is sure to follow. At any time an\nangry Bear is a terrible antagonist, especially if it be wounded with\nsufficient severity to cause pain, and not severely enough to cripple\nits movements. But, when to this easily-roused ferocity is added the\nfury of maternal feelings, it may be imagined that the hunters have\ngood reason to fear its attack.\n\nTo all animals that rear their young is given a sublime and almost\nsupernatural courage in defending their offspring, and from the\nlioness, that charges a host of armed men when her cubs are in danger,\nto the hen, which defies the soaring kite or prowling fox, or to the\nspider, that will give up her life rather than abandon her yet\nunhatched brood, the same self-sacrificing spirit actuates them all.\nMost terrible therefore is the wrath of a creature which possesses, as\nis the case of the Bear, the strongest maternal affections, added to\ngreat size, tremendous weapons, and gigantic strength. That the sight\nof a Bear bereaved of her young was well known to both writers and\ncontemporary readers of the Old Testament, is evident from the fact\nthat it is mentioned by several writers, and always as a familiar\nillustration of furious anger. See for example 2 Sam. xvii. 8, when\nHushai is dissuading Absalom from following the cautious counsel of\nAhithophel, \"For thou knowest thy father and his men, that they be\nmighty men of war, and they be chafed in their minds as a bear robbed\nof her whelps in the field.\" Solomon also, in the Proverbs (xvii. 12),\nuses the same image, \"Let a bear robbed of her whelps meet a man,\nrather than a fool in his folly.\"\n\nWhen the Bear fights, it delivers rapid strokes with its armed paw,\ntearing and rending away everything that it strikes. A blow from a\nbear's paw has been several times known to strip the entire skin,\ntogether with the hair, from a man's head, and, when fighting with\ndogs, to tear its enemies open as if each claw were a chisel. This\nmode of fighting is clearly alluded to by the prophet Hosea, who\nseems, from the graphic force of his sentences, to have been an actual\nspectator of some such combat, \"I will meet them as a bear that is\nbereaved of her whelps, and will rend the caul of their heart\" (Hos.\nxiii. 8).\n\nThat the Bear was a well-known animal both in the earlier and later\ntimes of the Scripture is also evident from the fact that it was\ntwice used as a symbol exhibited to a seer in a vision. The first of\nthese passages occurs in the book of Daniel (vii. 5), when the prophet\nis describing the wonderful vision of the four beasts:--\"And behold\nanother beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on\none side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it, between the teeth\nof it, and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.\" The\nsecond allusion occurs in the Revelation, the seven-headed and\nten-crowned beast having a form like that of a leopard, but feet like\nthose of a Bear.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HEDGEHOG, OR BITTERN.\n\n Various readings of the word _Kipp\u00f4d_--The Jewish Bible and its\n object--The Syrian Hedgehog and its appearance--Its fondness for\n dry spots--The prophecies of Isaiah and Zephaniah, and their\n bearing on the subject--The Porcupine supposed to be the\n Kipp\u00f4d--The Hedgehog and Porcupine called by the same name in\n Greek and Arabic--Habits of the Porcupine--Its quills, and the\n manner of their shedding.\n\n\nIn our Authorized Bible, there are one or two passages where the\nHebrew word _Kipp\u00f4d_ is translated as BITTERN. For example, there is\nIsaiah xiv. 22, 23, \"I will cut off from Babylon the name, and\nremnant, and son and nephew, saith the Lord. I will also make it a\npossession for the bittern, and pools of water, and I will sweep it\nwith the besom of destruction, saith the Lord of hosts.\"\n\nThen there is another passage of the same prophet (xxxiv. 11), \"But\nthe cormorant and the bittern shall possess it (_i.e._ Idumea), the\nowl also and the raven shall dwell in it.\" The last mention of this\ncreature occurs in Zephaniah ii. 14, \"And flocks shall lie down in the\nmidst of her (_i.e._ Nineveh), all the beasts of the nations: both the\nbittern and the cormorant shall lodge in the upper lintels of it;\ntheir voice shall sing in the windows; desolation shall be in the\nthresholds; for he shall uncover the cedar-work.\"\n\nNow, in the \"Jewish School and Family Bible,\" a new literal\ntranslation by Dr. A. Benisch, under the superintendence of the Chief\nRabbi, the word Kipp\u00f4d is translated, not as Bittern, but Hedgehog. As\nI shall have to refer to this translation repeatedly in the course of\nthe present work, I will give a few remarks made by the translator in\nthe preface.\n\n [Illustration: SYRIAN HEDGEHOG.\n\n \"_Pelican and hedgehog shall possess it._\"--ISA. xxxiv. 11. (Jewish\n Bible).]\n\nAfter premising that both Christian and Jew agree in considering the\nOld Testament as emanating from God, and reverencing it as such, he\nproceeds to say that the former, as holding himself absolved from the\nceremonial law of the Mosaic dispensation, has not the interest in the\nexact signification of every letter of the law which necessarily\nattaches itself to the Jew, who considers himself bound by that law,\nalthough some ceremonies, \"by their special reference to the Temple in\nJerusalem and the actual existence of Israel in the Holy Land, are at\npresent not practicable.\"\n\nHe then observes that the translators of the authorized Anglican\nversion, whose many excellences he fully admits, could not be\nconsidered as free agents, as they were bound by the positive\ninjunctions of their monarch, as well as by the less obvious, but more\npowerful influence of Christian authorities, to alter the original\ntranslation as little as possible, and to keep the ecclesiastical\nwords. Retaining, therefore, the renderings of the Anglican\ntranslation whenever it can be done without infringing upon absolute\naccuracy, the translator has marked with great care various passages\nwhere he has felt himself obliged to give a different rendering to the\nHebrew. Whenever words, especially such as are evidently the names of\nanimals, cannot be rendered with any amount of probability, they have\nnot been translated at all, and to those about which there are good\ngrounds of doubt a distinctive mark is affixed.\n\nNow to the word Hedgehog, by which the Hebrew Kipp\u00f4d is rendered, no\nsuch marking is attached in either of the three quoted passages, and\nit is evident therefore that the rendering is satisfactory to the\nhighest authorities on the Hebrew language. And we have the greater\nassurance of this accuracy, because, in the mere translation of the\nname of an animal, no doctrinal point is involved, and so there can be\nno temptation to the translator to be carried away by preconceived\nideas, and to give to the word that rendering which may tend to\nestablish his peculiar doctrinal ideas.\n\nThe Septuagint also translates Kipp\u00f4d as [Greek: echinos] (_echinus_)\n_i.e._ the Hedgehog, and this rendering is advocated by the eminent\nscholar Gesenius, who considers it to be formed from the Hebrew word\n_kaped_, _i.e._ contracted; reference being of course made to the\nHedgehog's habit of rolling itself up when alarmed, and presenting\nonly an array of bristles to the enemy. This derivation of the word is\ncertainly more convincing than a suggestion which has been made, that\nthe Hebrew Kipp\u00f4d may signify the Hedgehog, because it resembles the\nArabic name of the same animal, viz. Kunfod.\n\nAs therefore the word Kipp\u00f4d is translated as Hedgehog in the\nSeptuagint and Jewish Bible, and as Bittern in the authorized version,\nwe very naturally ask ourselves whether either or both of these\nanimals inhabit Palestine and the neighbouring countries. We find that\nboth are plentiful even at the present day, and that more than one\nspecies of Hedgehog and Bittern are known in the Holy Land. About the\nBittern we shall treat in good time, and will now take up the\nrendering of Hedgehog.\n\nThere are at least two species of Hedgehog known in Palestine, that of\nthe north being identical with our own well-known animal (_Erinaceus\nEuropoeus_), and the other being a distinct species (_Erinaceus\nSyriacus_). The latter animal is the species which has been chosen for\nillustration. It is smaller than its northern relative, lighter in\ncolour, and, as may be seen from the illustration, is rather different\nin general aspect.\n\nIts habits are identical with those of the European Hedgehog. Like\nthat animal it is carnivorous, feeding on worms, snails, frogs,\nlizards, snakes, and similar creatures, and occasionally devouring the\neggs and young of birds that make their nest on the ground.\n\nSmall as is the Hedgehog, it can devour all such animals with perfect\nease, its jaws and teeth being much stronger than might be anticipated\nfrom the size of their owner.\n\nOne or two objections that have been made to the translation of the\nKipp\u00f4d as Hedgehog must be mentioned, so that the reader may see what\nis said on both sides in dubious cases. One objection is, that the\nKipp\u00f4d is (in Isaiah xiv. 23) mentioned in connexion with pools of\nwater, and that, as the Hedgehog prefers dry places to wet, whereas\nthe Bittern is essentially a marsh-dweller, the latter rendering of\nthe word is preferable to the former. Again, as the Kipp\u00f4d is said by\nZephaniah to \"lodge in the upper lintels,\" and its \"voice to sing in\nthe windows,\" it must be a bird, and not a quadruped. We will examine\nthese passages separately, and see how they bear upon the subject. As\nto Zephaniah ii. 13, the Jewish Bible treats the passage as\nfollows:--\"And he will stretch out his hand against the north, and\ndestroy Assyria; and will make Nineveh a desolation, and arid like the\ndesert. And droves shall crouch in the midst of her, all the animals\nof nations: both pelican and hedgehog (Kipp\u00f4d) shall lodge nightly in\nthe knobs of it, a voice shall sing in the windows; drought shall be\nin the thresholds, for he shall uncover the cedar-work.\"\n\nNow the reader will see that, so far from the notion of marsh-land\nbeing connected with the Kipp\u00f4d, the whole imagery of the prophecy\nturns upon the opposite characteristics of desolation, aridity, and\ndrought. The same imagery is used in Isaiah xxxiv. 7-12, which the\nJewish Bible reads as follows, \"For it is the day of the vengeance of\nthe Eternal, and the year of recompenses for the quarrel of Zion. And\nthe brooks thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof\ninto brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It\nshall not go out night nor day; the smoke of it shall go up for ever;\nfrom generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass\nthrough it for ever and ever. Pelican and hedgehog (Kipp\u00f4d) shall\npossess it; owls also and ravens shall dwell in it; and he shall\nstretch over it the line of desolation, and the stones of emptiness.\"\nAnd to the end of the chapter the same idea of drought, desolation,\nand solitude is carried out.\n\nThus, even putting the question in the simplest manner, we have two\nlong passages which directly connect the Kipp\u00f4d with drought, aridity,\nand desolation, in opposition to one in which the Kipp\u00f4d and \"pools of\nwater\" are mentioned in proximity to each other. Now the fact is, that\nthe sites of Nineveh and Babylon fulfil both prophecies, being both\ndry and marshy--dry away from the river, and marshy among the\nreed-swamps that now exist on its banks.\n\nSo much for the question of locality.\n\nAs to the second objection, namely, that the Kipp\u00f4d was to lodge in\nthe upper lintels, and therefore must be a bird, and not a quadruped,\nit is sufficient to say that the allusion is evidently made to ruins\nthat are thrown down, and not to buildings that are standing upright.\n\nAs to the words, \"their voices shall sing in the windows,\" the reader\nmay see, on reference to the English Bible, that the word \"their\" is\nprinted in italics, showing that it does not exist in the original,\nand has been supplied by the translator. Taking the passage as it\nreally stands, \"Both the cormorant and the bittern (Kipp\u00f4d) shall\nlodge in the upper lintels of it; a voice shall sing in the windows,\"\nit is evident that the voice or sound which sings in the windows does\nnot necessarily refer to the cormorant and Bittern at all. Dr. Harris\nremarks that \"the phrase is elliptical, and implies 'the voice of\nbirds.'\"\n\n\n\n\nTHE PORCUPINE.\n\n Presumed identity of the Kipp\u00f4d with the Porcupine--The same\n Greek name applied to the Porcupine and Hedgehog--Habits of the\n Porcupine--the common Porcupine found plentifully in Palestine.\n\n\nAlthough, like the hedgehog, the Porcupine is not mentioned by name in\nthe Scriptures, many commentators think that the word Kipp\u00f4d signifies\nboth the hedgehog and Porcupine.\n\nThat the two animals should be thought to be merely two varieties of\none species is not astonishing, when we remember the character of the\npeople among whom the Porcupine lives. Not having the least idea of\nscientific geology, they look only to the most conspicuous\ncharacteristics, and because the Porcupine and hedgehog are both\ncovered with an armature of quills, and the quills are far more\nconspicuous than the teeth, the inhabitants of Palestine naturally\nclass the two animals together. In reality, they belong to two very\ndifferent orders, the hedgehog being classed with the shrew-mice and\nmoles, while the Porcupine is a rodent animal, and is classed with the\nrats, rabbits, beavers, marmots, and other rodents.\n\nAt the present day the inhabitants of the Holy Land believe the\nPorcupine to be only a large species of hedgehog, and the same name is\napplied to both animals. Such is the case even in the Greek language,\nthe word Hystrix ([Greek: hystrinx] or [Greek: hysthrix]) being\nemployed indifferently in either sense.\n\nIts food is different from that of the hedgehog, for whereas the\nhedgehog lives entirely on animal food, as has been already mentioned,\nthe Porcupine is as exclusively a vegetable eater, feeding chiefly on\nroots and bark.\n\nIt is quite as common in Palestine as the hedgehog, a fact which\nincreases the probability that the two animals may have been mentioned\nunder a common title. Being a nocturnal animal, it retires during the\nday-time to some crevice in a rock or burrow in the ground, and there\nlies sleeping until the sunset awakens it and calls it to action. And\nas the hedgehog is also a nocturnal animal, the similarity of habit\nserves to strengthen the mutual resemblance.\n\nThe Porcupine is peculiarly fitted for living in dry and unwatered\nspots, as, like many other animals, of which our common rabbit is a\nfamiliar example, it can exist without water, obtaining the needful\nmoisture from the succulent roots on which it feeds.\n\nThe sharply pointed quills with which its body is covered are solid,\nand strengthened in a most beautiful manner by internal ribs, that run\nlongitudinally along its length, exactly like those of the hollow iron\nmasts, which are now coming so much into use. As they are, in fact,\ngreatly developed hairs, they are continually shed and replaced, and\nwhen they are about to fall are so loosely attached that they fall off\nif pulled slightly, or even if the animal shakes itself. Consequently\nthe shed quills that lie about the localities inhabited by the\nPorcupine indicate its whereabouts, and so plentiful are these quills\nin some places that quite a bundle can be collected in a short time.\n\nThere are many species of Porcupines which inhabit different parts of\nthe world, but that which has been mentioned is the common Porcupine\nof Europe, Asia, and Africa (_Hystrix cristata_).\n\n\n\n\nTHE MOLE.\n\n The two Hebrew words which are translated as Mole--Obscurity of\n the former name--A parallel case in our own language--The second\n name--The Moles and the Bats, why associated together--The real\n Mole of Scripture, its different names, and its place in\n zoology--Description of the Mole-rat and its general\n habits--Curious superstition--Discovery of the species by Mr.\n Tristram--Scripture and science--How the Mole-rat finds its\n food--Distinction between the Mole and the present animal.\n\n\nThere are two words which are translated as Mole in our authorized\nversion of the Bible. One of them is so obscure that there seems no\npossibility of deciding the creature that is represented by it. We\ncannot even tell to what class of the animal kingdom it refers,\nbecause in more than one place it is mentioned as one of the unclean\nbirds that might not be eaten (translated as _swan_ in our version),\nwhereas, in another place, it is enumerated among the unclean creeping\nthings.\n\n [Illustration: THE MOLE-RAT.\n\n \"_These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that\n creep upon the earth ... the lizard, the snail, and the mole._\"--LEV.\n xi. 29, 30.]\n\nWe may conjecture that the same word might be used to designate two\ndistinct animals, though we have no clue to their identification. It\nis rather a strange coincidence, in corroboration of this theory, that\nour word Mole signifies three distinct objects--firstly, an animal;\nsecondly, a cutaneous growth; and thirdly, a bank of earth. Now,\nsupposing English to be a dead language, like the Hebrew, it may well\nbe imagined that a translator of an English book would feel extremely\nperplexed when he saw the word Mole used in such widely different\nsenses.\n\nThe best Hebraists can do no more than offer a conjecture founded on\nthe structure of the word _Tinshemeth_, which is thought by some to be\nthe chameleon. Some think that it is the Mole, some the ibis, some the\nsalamander, while others consider it to be the centipede; and in\nneither case have any decisive arguments been adduced.\n\nWe will therefore leave the former of these two names, and proceed to\nthe second, _Chephor-peroth_.\n\nThis word occurs in that passage of Isaiah which has already been\nquoted when treating of the bat. \"In that day a man shall cast his\nidols of silver and his idols of gold, which they made each one to\nhimself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; to go into the\nclefts of the rocks and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of\nthe Lord and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake\nterribly the earth.\"\n\nIt is highly probable that the animal in question is the Mole of\nPalestine, which is not the same as our European species, but is much\nlarger in size, and belongs to a different order of mammalia. The true\nMole is one of the insectivorous and carnivorous animals, and is\nallied to the shrews and the hedgehogs; whereas the Mole of Palestine\n(_Spalax typhlus_) is one of the rodents, and allied to the rabbits,\nmice, marmots, and jerboas. A better term for it is the Mole-rat, by\nwhich name it is familiar to zoologists. It is also known by the names\nof Slepez and Nenni.\n\nIn length it is about eight inches, and its colour is a pale slate. As\nis the case with the true Moles, the eyes are of very minute\ndimensions, and are not visible through the thick soft fur with which\nthe whole head and body are covered. Neither are there any visible\nexternal ears, although the ear is really very large, and extremely\nsensitive to sound. This apparent privation of both ears and eyes\ngives to the animal a most singular and featureless appearance, its\nhead being hardly recognisable as such but for the mouth, and the\nenormous projecting teeth, which not only look formidable, but really\nare so. There is a curious superstition in the Ukraine, that if a man\nwill dare to grasp a Mole-rat in his bare hand, allow it to bite him,\nand then squeeze it to death, the hand that did the deed will ever\nafterwards possess the virtue of healing goitre or scrofula.\n\nThis animal is spread over a very large tract of country, and is very\ncommon in Palestine. Mr. Tristram gives an interesting account of its\ndiscovery. \"We had long tried in vain to capture the Mole of\nPalestine. Its mines and its mounds we had seen everywhere, and\nreproached ourselves with having omitted the mole-trap among the\nitems of our outfit. From the size of the mounds and the shallowness\nof the subterranean passages, we felt satisfied it could not be the\nEuropean species, and our hopes of solving the question were raised\nwhen we found that one of them had taken up its quarters close to our\ncamp. After several vain attempts to trap it, an Arab one night\nbrought a live Mole in a jar to the tent. It was no Mole properly so\ncalled, but the Mole-rat, which takes its place throughout Western\nAsia. The man, having observed our anxiety to possess a specimen,\nrefused to part with it for less than a hundred piastres, and\nscornfully rejected the twenty piastres I offered. Ultimately, Dr.\nChaplin purchased it for five piastres after our departure, and I kept\nit alive for some time in a box, feeding it on sliced onions.\"\n\nThe same gentleman afterwards caught many of the Mole-rats, and kept\nthem in earthen vessels, as they soon gnawed their way through wood.\nThey fed chiefly on bulbs, but also ate sopped bread. Like many other\nanimals, they reposed during the day, and were active throughout the\nnight.\n\nThe author then proceeds to remark on the peculiarly appropriate\ncharacter of the prophecy that the idols should be cast to the Moles\nand the bats. Had the European Mole been the animal to which reference\nwas made, there would have been comparatively little significance in\nthe connexion of the two names, because, although both animals are\nlovers of darkness, they do not inhabit similar localities. But the\nMole-rat is fond of frequenting deserted ruins and burial-places, so\nthat the Moles and the bats are really companions, and as such are\nassociated together in the sacred narrative. Here, as in many other\ninstances, we find that closer study of the Scriptures united to more\nextended knowledge are by no means the enemies of religion, as some\nwell-meaning, but narrow-minded persons think. On the contrary, the\nScriptures were never so well understood, and their truth and force so\nwell recognised, as at the present day; and science has proved to be,\nnot the destroyer of the Bible, but its interpreter. We shall soon\ncease to hear of \"Science _versus_ the Bible,\" and shall substitute\n\"Science and the Bible _versus_ Ignorance and Prejudice.\"\n\nThe Mole-rat needs not to dig such deep tunnels as the true Moles,\nbecause its food does not lie so deep. The Moles live chiefly upon\nearthworms, and are obliged to procure them in the varying depths to\nwhich they burrow. But the Mole-rat lives mostly upon roots,\npreferring those of a bulbous nature. Now bulbous roots are, as a\nrule, situated near the surface of the ground, and, therefore, any\nanimal which feeds upon them must be careful not to burrow too deeply,\nlest it should pass beneath them. The shallowness of the burrows is\nthus accounted for. Gardens are often damaged by this animal, the\nroot-crops, such as carrots and onions, affording plenty of food\nwithout needing much exertion.\n\nThe Mole-rat does not keep itself quite so jealously secluded as does\nour common Mole, but occasionally will come out of the burrow and lie\non the ground, enjoying the warm sunshine. Still it is not easily to\nbe approached; for though its eyes are almost useless, the ears are so\nsharp, and the animal is so wary, that at the sound of a footstep it\ninstantly seeks the protection of its burrow, where it may bid\ndefiance to its foes.\n\nHow it obtains its food is a mystery. There seems to be absolutely no\nmethod of guiding itself to the precise spot where a bulb may be\ngrowing. It is not difficult to conjecture the method by which the\nMole discovers its prey. Its sensitive ears may direct it to the spot\nwhere a worm is driving its way through the earth, and should it come\nupon its prey, the very touch of the worm, writhing in terror at the\napproach of its enemy, would be sufficient to act as a guide. I have\nkept several Moles, and always noticed that, though they would pass\nclose to a worm without seeming to detect its presence, either by\nsight or scent, at the slightest touch they would spring round, dart\non the worm, and in a moment seize it between their jaws. But with the\nMole-rat the case is different. The root can utter no sound, and can\nmake no movement, nor is it likely that the odour of the bulb should\npenetrate through the earth to a very great distance.\n\n\n\n\nTHE MOUSE.\n\n Conjectures as to the right translation of the Hebrew word\n _Akbar_--Signification of the word--The Mice which marred the\n land--Miracles, and their economy of power--The Field-mouse--Its\n destructive habits and prolific nature--The insidious nature of\n its attacks, and its power of escaping observation--The Hamster,\n and its habits--Its custom of storing up provisions for the\n winter--Its fertility and unsociable nature--The Jerboa, its\n activity and destructiveness--Jerboas and Hamsters eaten by\n Arabs and Syrians--Various species of Dormice and Sand-rats.\n\n\nThat the Mouse mentioned in the Old Testament was some species of\nrodent animal is tolerably clear, though it is impossible to state any\nparticular species as being signified by the Hebrew word _Akbar_. The\nprobable derivation of this name is from two words which signify\n\"destruction of corn,\" and it is therefore evident that allusion is\nmade to some animal which devours the produce of the fields, and which\nexists in sufficient numbers to make its voracity formidable.\n\nSome commentators on the Old Testament translate the word Akbar as\njerboa. Now, although the jerboa is common in Syria, it is not nearly\nso plentiful as other rodent animals, and would scarcely be selected\nas the means by which a terrible disaster is made to befall a whole\ncountry. The student of Scripture is well aware that, in those\nexceptional occurrences which are called miracles, a needless\ndevelopment of the wonder-working power is never employed. We are not\nto suppose, for example, that the clouds of locusts that devoured the\nharvests of the Egyptians were created for this express purpose, but\nthat their already existing hosts were concentrated upon a limited\narea, instead of being spread over a large surface. Nor need we fancy\nthat the frogs which rendered their habitations unclean, and\ncontaminated their food, were brought into existence simply to inflict\na severe punishment on the fastidious and superstitious Egyptians.\n\nOf course, had such an exercise of creative power been needed, it\nwould have been used, but we can all see that a needless miracle is\nnever worked. He who would not suffer even a crumb of the miraculously\nmultiplied bread to be wasted, is not likely to waste that power by\nwhich the miracle was wrought.\n\nIf we refer to the early history of the Israelitish nation, as told in\n1 Sam. iv.--vi., we shall find that the Israelites made an\nunwarrantable use of the ark, by taking it into battle, and that it\nwas captured and carried off into the country of the Philistines. Then\nvarious signs were sent to warn the captors to send the ark back to\nits rightful possessors. Dagon, the great fish-god, was prostrated\nbefore it, painful diseases attacked them, so that many died, and\nscarcely any seem to have escaped, while their harvests were ravaged\nby numbers of \"mice that marred the land.\"\n\nThe question is now simple enough. If the ordinary translation is\naccepted, and the word Akbar rendered as Mouse, would the necessary\nconditions be fulfilled, _i.e._ would the creature be destructive, and\nwould it exist in very great numbers? Now we shall find that both\nthese conditions are fulfilled by the common Field-mouse (_Arvicola\narvalis_).\n\nThis little creature is, in proportion to its size, one of the most\ndestructive animals in the world. Let its numbers be increased from\nany cause whatever, and it will most effectually \"mar the land.\" It\nwill devour every cereal that is sown, and kill almost any sapling\nthat is planted. It does not even wait for the corn to spring up, but\nwill burrow beneath the surface, and dig out the seed before it has\nhad time to sprout. In the early part of the year, it will eat the\ngreen blade as soon as it springs out of the ground, and is an adept\nat climbing the stalks of corn, and plundering the ripe ears in the\nautumn.\n\nWhen stacked or laid up in barns, the harvest is by no means safe, for\nthe Mice will penetrate into any ordinary barn, and find their way\ninto any carelessly-built stack, from which they can scarcely be\nejected. The rat itself is not so dire a foe to the farmer, as the\nless obtrusive, but equally mischievous Field-mouse. The ferret will\ndrive the rats out of their holes, and if they have taken possession\nof a wheat-stack they can be ejected by depriving them of access to\nwater. But the burrows of the Field-mouse are so small that a ferret\ncannot make its way through them, and the nightly dew that falls on\nthe stack affords an ample supply of water.\n\n [Illustration: THE FIELD-MOUSE.\n\n \"_Wherefore ye shall make images of your mice that mar the land._\"--1\n SAM. vi. 5.]\n\nWhen the Field-mouse is deprived of the food which it loves best, it\nfinds a subsistence among the trees. Whenever mice can discover a\nnewly-planted sapling, they hold great revel upon it, eating away the\ntender young bark as high as they can reach, and consequently\ndestroying the tree as effectually as if it were cut down. Even when\nthe young trees fail them, and no tender bark is to be had, the\nField-mice can still exert their destructive powers. They will then\nbetake themselves to the earth, burrow beneath its surface, and devour\nthe young rootlets of the forest trees. All botanists know that a\nhealthy tree is continually pushing forward fresh roots below the\nground, in order to gain sufficient nourishment to supply the\nincreasing growth above. If, therefore, these young roots are\ndestroyed, the least harm that can happen to the tree is that its\nfurther growth is arrested; while, in many cases, the tree, which\ncannot repair the injuries it has received, droops gradually, and\nfinally dies. Even in this country, the Field-mouse has proved itself\na terrible enemy to the agriculturist, and has devastated considerable\ntracts of land.\n\nSo much for the destructive powers of the Field-mouse, and the next\npoint to be considered is its abundance.\n\nNearly all the rats and mice are singularly prolific animals,\nproducing a considerable number at a brood, and having several broods\nin a season. The Field-mouse is by no means an exception to the\ngeneral rule, but produces as many young in a season as any of the\nMice.\n\nNot only is it formidable from its numbers, but from the insidious\nnature of its attacks. Any one can see a rabbit, a hare, or even a\nrat; but to see a Field-mouse is not easy, even when the little\ncreatures are present in thousands. A Field-mouse never shows itself\nexcept from necessity, its instinct teaching it to escape the\nobservation of its many furred and feathered enemies. Short-legged and\nsoft-furred, it threads its noiseless way among the herbage with such\ngentle suppleness that scarcely a grass-blade is stirred, while, if it\nshould be forced to pass over a spot of bare ground, the red-brown hue\nof its fur prevents it from being detected by an inexperienced eye.\nGenerally the Field-mouse is safe from human foes, and has only to\ndread the piercing eye and swift wings of the hawk, or the silent\nflight and sharp talons of the owl.\n\nAlthough there can be no doubt that the Field-mouse is one of the\nanimals to which the name of Akbar is given, it is probable that many\nspecies were grouped under this one name. Small rodents of various\nkinds are very plentiful in Palestine, and there are several species\nclosely allied to the Field-mouse itself.\n\nAmong them is the Hamster (_Cricetus frumentarius_), so widely known\nfor the ravages which it makes among the crops. This terribly\ndestructive animal not only steals the crops for immediate\nsubsistence, but lays up a large stock of provisions for the winter,\nseeming to be actuated by a sort of miserly passion for collecting and\nstoring away. There seems to be no bounds to the quantity of food\nwhich a Hamster will carry into its subterranean store-house, from\nseventy to one hundred pounds' weight being sometimes taken out of\nthe burrow of a single animal. The fact of the existence of these\nlarge stores shows that the animal must need them, and accordingly we\nfind that the Hamster is only a partial hibernator, as it is awake\nduring a considerable portion of the winter months, and is\nconsequently obliged to live on the stores which it has collected.\n\nIt is an exceedingly prolific animal, each pair producing on an\naverage twenty-five young in the course of a year. The families are\nunsociable, and, as soon as they are strong enough to feed themselves,\nthe young Hamsters leave their home, and make separate burrows for\nthemselves. Thus we see that the Hamster, as well as the Field-mouse,\nfulfils the conditions which are needed in order to class it under the\ngeneral title of Akbar.\n\nI have already stated that some translators of the Bible use the word\nJerboa as a rendering of the Hebrew Akbar. As the Jerboa certainly is\nfound in Palestine, there is some foundation for this idea, and we may\nsafely conjecture that it also is one of the smaller rodents which are\ngrouped together under the appellation of Mouse.\n\nThe Common Jerboa (_Dipus \u00c6gyptiacus_) is plentiful in Palestine, and\nseveral other species inhabit the same country, known at once by their\nlong and slender legs, which give them so curious a resemblance to the\nkangaroos of Australia. The Jerboas pass over the ground with\nastonishing rapidity. Instead of creeping stealthily among the\ngrass-blades, like the short-limbed field-mouse, the Jerboa flies\nalong with a succession of wonderful leaps, darting here and there\nwith such rapidity that the eye can scarcely follow its wayward\nmovements. When quiet and undisturbed, it hops along gently enough,\nbut as soon as it takes alarm, it darts off in its peculiar manner,\nwhich is to the ordinary walk of quadrupeds what the devious course of\na frightened snipe is to the steady flight of birds in general.\n\nIt prefers hot and dry situations, its feet being defended by a thick\ncoating of stiff hairs, which serve the double purpose of protecting\nit from the heat, and giving it a firm hold on the ground. It is\nrather a destructive animal, its sharp and powerful teeth enabling it\nto bite its way through obstacles which would effectually stop an\nordinary Mouse. That the Jerboa may be one of the Akbarim is rendered\nlikely by the prohibition in Lev. xi. 29, forbidding the Mouse to be\neaten. It would be scarcely probable that such a command need have\nbeen issued against eating the common Mouse, whereas the Jerboa, a\nmuch larger and palatable animal, is always eaten by the Arabs. The\nHamster is at the present day eaten in Northern Syria.\n\nBeside these creatures there are the Dormice, several species of which\nanimal inhabit Palestine at the present day. There are also the\nSand-rats, one species of which is larger than our ordinary rats. The\nSand-rats live more in the deserts than the cultivated lands, making\ntheir burrows at the foot of hills, and among the roots of bushes.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HARE.\n\n The prohibitions of the Mosaic law--The chewing of the cud, and\n division of the hoof--Identity of the Hare of\n Scripture--Rumination described--The Hare a rodent and not a\n ruminant--Cowper and his Hares--Structure of the rodent\n tooth--The Mosaic law accommodated to its recipients--The Hares\n of Palestine and their habits.\n\n\nAmong the many provisions of the Mosaic law are several which refer to\nthe diet of the Israelites, and which prohibit certain kinds of food.\nSpecial stress is laid upon the flesh of animals, and the list of\nthose which may be lawfully eaten is a singularly restricted one, all\nbeing excluded except those which \"divide the hoof and chew the cud.\"\nAnd, lest there should be any mistake about the matter, examples are\ngiven both of those animals which may and those which may not be\neaten.\n\nThe ox, sheep, goat, and antelopes generally are permitted as lawful\nfood, because they fulfil both conditions; whereas there is a special\nprohibition of the swine, because it divides the hoof but does not\nchew the cud, and of the camel, coney, and hare because they chew the\ncud, but do not divide the hoof. Our business at present is with the\nlast of these animals.\n\nConsiderable discussion has been raised concerning this animal,\nbecause, as is well known to naturalists, the Hare is not one of the\nruminant animals, but belongs to the same order as the rat, rabbit,\nbeaver, and other rodents. Neither its teeth nor its stomach are\nconstructed for the purpose of enabling it to ruminate, i.e. to return\ninto the mouth the partially-digested food, and then to masticate it\nafresh; and therefore it has been thought that either there is some\nmistake in the sacred narrative, or that the Hebrew word has been\nmistranslated.\n\n [Illustration: THE SYRIAN HARE.\n\n \"_Nevertheless, these ye shall not eat of them that chew the cud, or\n of them that divide the cloven hoof: as the camel, and the hare, and\n the coney._\"--DEUT. xiv. 7.]\n\nTaking the latter point first, as being the simplest of the two, we\nfind that the Hebrew word which is rendered as Hare is Arnebeth, and\nthat it is rendered in the Septuagint as Dasypus, or the Hare,--a\nrendering which the Jewish Bible adopts. That the Arnebeth is really\nthe Hare may also be conjectured from the fact that the Arabic name\nfor that animal is Arneb. In consequence of the rather wide sense to\nwhich the Greek word Dasypus (_i.e._ hairy-foot) is used, some\ncommentators have suggested that the rabbit may have been included in\nthe same title. This, however, is not at all likely, inasmuch as the\nHare is very plentiful in Palestine, and the rabbit is believed not\nto be indigenous to that part of the world. And, even if the two\nanimals had been classed under the same title, the physiological\ndifficulty would not be removed.\n\nBefore proceeding further, it will be as well to give a brief\ndescription of the curious act called rumination, or \"chewing the\ncud.\"\n\nThere are certain animals, such as the oxen, antelopes, deer, sheep,\ngoats, camels, &c. which have teeth unfitted for the rapid mastication\nof food, and which therefore are supplied with a remarkable apparatus\nby which the food can be returned into the mouth when the animal has\nleisure, and be re-masticated before it passes into the true digestive\norgans.\n\nFor this purpose they are furnished with four stomachs, which are\narranged in the following order. First comes the paunch or \"rumen\"\n(whence the word \"ruminating\"), into which passes the food in a very\nrough state, just as it is torn, rather than bitten, from the herbage,\nand which is analogous to the crop in birds. It thence passes into the\nsecond stomach, or \"honeycomb,\" the walls of which are covered with\nsmall angular cells. Into those cells the food is received from the\nfirst stomach, and compressed into little balls, which can be\nvoluntarily returned into the mouth for mastication.\n\nAfter the second mastication has been completed, the food passes at\nonce into the third stomach, and thence into the fourth, which is the\ntrue digesting cavity. By a peculiar structure of these organs, the\nanimal is able to convey its food either into the first or third\nstomach, at will, _i.e._ into the first when the grass is eaten, and\ninto the third after rumination. Thus it will be seen that an animal\nwhich chews the cud must have teeth of a certain character, and be\npossessed of the fourfold stomach which has just been described.\n\nTwo points are conceded which seem to be utterly irreconcilable with\neach other. The first is that the Mosaic law distinctly states that\nthe Hare chews the cud; the second is, that in point of fact the Hare\nis not, and cannot be, a ruminating animal, possessing neither the\nteeth nor the digestive organs which are indispensable for that\nprocess. Yet, totally opposed as these statements appear to be, they\nare in fact, not so irreconcilable as they seem.\n\nWhy the flesh of certain animals was prohibited, we do not at the\npresent time know. That the flesh of swine should be forbidden food is\nlikely enough, considering the effects which the habitual eating of\nswine's flesh is said to produce in hot countries. But it does seem\nvery strange that the Israelites should have been forbidden to eat the\nflesh of the camel, the coney (or hyrax), and the Hare, and that these\nanimals should have been specified is a proof that the eating or\nrefraining from their flesh was not a mere sanitary regulation, but\nwas a matter of importance. The flesh of all these three animals is\nquite as good and nutritious as that of the oxen, or goats, which are\neaten in Palestine, and that of the Hare is far superior to them.\nTherefore, the people of Israel, who were always apt to take liberties\nwith the restrictive laws, and were crafty enough to evade them on so\nmany occasions, would have been likely to pronounce that the flesh of\nthe Hare was lawful meat, because the animal chewed the cud, or\nappeared to do so, and they would discreetly have omitted the passage\nwhich alluded to the division of the hoof.\n\nTo a non-scientific observer the Hare really does appear to chew the\ncud. When it is reposing at its ease, it continually moves its jaws\nabout as if eating something, an action which may readily be mistaken\nfor true rumination. Even Cowper, the poet, who kept some hares for\nseveral years, and had them always before his eyes, was deceived by\nthis mumbling movement of the jaws. Speaking of his favourite hare,\n\"Puss,\" he proceeds as follows: \"Finding him exceedingly tractable, I\nmade it my custom to carry him always after breakfast into the garden,\nwhere he hid himself generally under the leaves of a cucumber vine,\nsleeping, _or chewing the cud_, till evening.\"\n\nThe real object of this continual grinding or mumbling movement is\nsimple enough. The chisel-like incisor teeth of the rodent animals\nneed to be rubbed against each other, in order to preserve their edge\nand shape, and if perchance such friction should be wanting to a\ntooth, as, for example, by the breaking of the opposite tooth, it\nbecomes greatly elongated, and sometimes grows to such a length as to\nprevent the animal from eating. Instinctively, therefore, the Hare, as\nwell as the rabbit and other rodents, always likes to be nibbling at\nsomething, as any one knows who has kept rabbits in wooden hutches,\nthe object of this nibbling not being to eat the wood, but to keep\nthe teeth in order.\n\nBut we may naturally ask ourselves, why the Mosaic law, an emanation\nfrom heaven, should mention an animal as being a ruminant, when its\nvery structure shows that such an act was utterly impossible? The\nanswer is clear enough. The law was suited to the capacity of those\nfor whom it was intended, and was never meant to be a handbook of\nscience, as well as a code of religious duties and maxims. The Jews,\nlike other Orientals, were indifferent to that branch of knowledge\nwhich we designate by the name of physical science, and it was\nnecessary that the language in which the law was conveyed to them\nshould be accommodated to their capabilities of receiving it.\n\nIt would have been worse than useless to have interrupted the solemn\nrevelation of Divine will with a lesson in comparative anatomy; the\nobject of the passage in question being, not to teach the Jews the\ndistinctive characteristics of a rodent and a ruminant, but to guard\nagainst their mistaking the Hare for one of the ruminants which were\npermitted as food. That they would in all probability have fallen into\nthat mistake is evident from the fact that the Arabs are exceedingly\nfond of the flesh of the Hare, and accept it, as well as the camel, as\nlawful food, because it chews the cud, the division of the hoof not\nbeing considered by them as an essential.\n\nHares are very plentiful in Palestine, and at least two species are\nfound in that country. One of them, which inhabits the more northern\nand hilly portion of Palestine, closely resembles our own species, but\nhas not ears quite so long in proportion, while the head is broader.\nThe second species, which lives in the south, and in the valley of the\nJordan, is very small, is of a light dun colour, and has very long\nears. In their general habits, these Hares resemble the Hare of\nEngland.\n\n\n\n\nCATTLE.\n\n The cattle of Palestine, and their decadence at the present\n day--Ox-flesh not used for food in modern times--Oxen of the\n stall, and oxen of the pasture--The use of the ox in\n agriculture--The yoke and its structure--The plough and the\n goad--The latter capable of being used as a weapon--Treading out\n the corn--The cart and its wheels--The ox used as a beast of\n burden--Cattle turned loose to graze--The bulls of\n Bashan--Curiosity of the ox-tribe--A season of drought--Branding\n the cattle--An Egyptian field scene--Cattle-keeping an\n honourable post--The ox as used for sacrifice--Ox-worship--The\n bull Apis, and his history--Persistency of the\n bull-worship--Jeroboam's sin--Various names of cattle--The\n Indian buffalo.\n\n\nUnder this head we shall treat of the domesticated oxen of Scripture,\nwhether mentioned as Bull, Cow, Ox, Calf, Heifer, &c.\n\nTwo distinct species of cattle are found in Palestine, namely, the\nordinary domesticated ox, and the Indian buffalo, which lives in the\nlow-lying and marshy valley of the Jordan. Of this species we shall\ntreat presently.\n\nThe domesticated cattle are very much like our own, but there is not\namong them that diversity of breed for which this country is famous;\nnor is there even any distinction of long and short horned cattle.\nThere are some places where the animals are larger than in others, but\nthis difference is occasioned simply by the better quality and greater\nquantity of the food.\n\nAs is the case in most parts of the world where civilization has made\nany progress, Domesticated Cattle were, and still are, plentiful in\nPalestine. Even at the present time the cattle are in common use,\nthough it is evident, from many passages of Holy Writ, that in the\ndays of Jud\u00e6a's prosperity cattle were far more numerous than they are\nnow, and were treated in a better fashion.\n\nTo take their most sacred use first, a constant supply of cattle was\nneeded for the sacrifices, and, as it was necessary that every animal\nwhich was brought to the altar should be absolutely perfect, it is\nevident that great care was required in order that the breed should\nnot deteriorate, a skill which has long been rendered useless by the\nabandonment of the sacrifices.\n\nAnother reason for their better nurture in the times of old is that in\nthose days the ox was largely fed and fatted for the table, just as is\ndone with ourselves. At the present day, the flesh of the cattle is\npractically unused as food, that of the sheep or goat being always\nemployed, even when a man gives a feast to his friends. But, in the\nold times, stalled oxen, _i.e._ oxen kept asunder from those which\nwere used for agricultural purposes, and expressly fatted for the\ntable, were in constant use. See for example the well-known passage in\nthe Prov. xv. 17, \"Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, than a\nstalled ox and hatred therewith.\" Again, the Prophet Jeremiah makes\nuse of a curious simile, \"Egypt is like a very fair heifer, but\ndestruction cometh; it cometh out of the north. Also her hired men are\nin the midst of her like fatted bullocks [or, bullocks of the stall],\nfor they also are turned back, and are fled away together.\" (Jer.\nxlvi. 20.) And in 1 Kings iv. 22, 23, when describing the glories of\nSolomon's household, the sacred writer draws a distinction between the\noxen which were especially fattened for the table of the king and the\nsuperior officers, and those which were consumed by the lower orders\nof his household: \"And Solomon's provision for one day was thirty\nmeasures of fine flour, and threescore measures of meal, ten fat oxen,\nand twenty oxen out of the pastures, and an hundred sheep, beside\nharts, and roebucks, and fallow-deer, and fatted fowl.\" Again, in the\nwell-known parable of the king's marriage, there is an allusion to\nfatted animals, and a distinction is made between the oxen of the\npasture and those of the stall. \"Again, he sent forth other servants,\nsaying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner,\nmy oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready.\"\n\nCalves--mostly, if not always, bull-calves--were largely used for food\nin Palestine, and in the households of the wealthy were fatted for the\ntable. See, for example, the familiar parable of the prodigal son, in\nwhich the rejoicing father is mentioned as preparing a great feast in\nhonour of his son's return, and ordering the fatted calf to be\nkilled--the calf in question being evidently one of the animals that\nwere kept in good condition against any festive occasion. And, even in\nthe earliest history of the Bible, the custom of keeping a fatted calf\nevidently prevailed, as is shown by the conduct of Abraham, who, when\nhe was visited by the three heavenly guests, \"ran unto the herd, and\nfetched a calf, tender and good,\" and had it killed and dressed at\nonce, after the still existing fashion of the East.\n\nBut, even in the times of Israel's greatest prosperity, the chief use\nof the ox was as an agricultural labourer, thus reversing the custom\nof this country, where the horse has taken the place of the ox as a\nbeast of draught, and where cattle are principally fed for food.\nPloughing was, and is, always performed by oxen, and allusions to this\noffice are scattered plentifully through the Old and New Testaments.\n\nWhen understood in this sense, oxen are almost always spoken of in\nconnexion with the word \"yoke,\" and as each yoke comprised two oxen,\nit is evident that the word is used as we employ the term \"brace,\" or\npair. The yoke, which is the chief part of the harness, is a very\nsimple affair. A tolerably stout beam of wood is cut of a sufficient\nlength to rest upon the necks of the oxen standing side by side, and a\ncouple of hollows are scooped out to receive the crest of the neck. In\norder to hold it in its place, two flexible sticks are bent under\ntheir necks, and the ends fixed into the beam of the yoke. In the\nmiddle of this yoke is fastened the pole of the plough or cart, and\nthis is all the harness that is used, not even traces being required.\n\nIt will be seen that so rude an implement as this would be very likely\nto gall the necks of the animals, unless the hollows were carefully\nsmoothed, and the heavy beam adapted to the necks of the animals. This\ngalling nature of the yoke, so familiar to the Israelites, is used\nrepeatedly as a metaphor in many passages of the Old and New\nTestaments. These passages are too numerous to be quoted, but I will\ngive one or two of the most conspicuous among them. The earliest\nmention of the yoke in the Scriptures is a metaphor.\n\nAfter Jacob had deceived his father, in procuring for himself the\nblessing which was intended for his elder brother, Isaac comforts Esau\nby the prophecy that, although he must serve his brother, yet \"it\nshall come to pass when thou shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt\nbreak his yoke from off thy neck.\" Again, in the next passage where\nthe yoke is mentioned, namely, Lev. xxvi. 13, the word is employed in\nthe metaphorical sense: \"I am the Lord your God, which brought you\nforth out of the land of Egypt, that ye should not be their bondmen,\nand I have broken the bands of your yoke, and made you go upright.\"\n\nThen, in Deut. xxviii. 48, the word yoke is not only used\nmetaphorically, but with an addition that forcibly expresses its\nweight and galling character: \"Therefore shalt thou serve thine\nenemies, which the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger, and in\nthirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things, and He shall put\na yoke of iron upon thy neck, until He have destroyed thee.\"\n\nThe word yoke is also used as a metaphor for servitude, even of a\ndomestic character, as we may see in 1 Tim. vi. 1: \"Let as many\nservants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all\nhonour.\" In the Acts of the Apostles, we find St. Peter using the same\nmetaphor: \"Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke on the neck of the\ndisciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?\" And\nthe Lord Himself uses the same metaphor in the well-known passage,\n\"Take my yoke upon you, for my yoke is easy and my burden light.\"\n\nThe plough was equally simple, and consisted essentially of a bent\nbranch, one end of which was armed with an iron point by way of a\nshare, while the other formed the pole or beam, and was fastened to\nthe middle of the yoke. It was guided by a handle, which was usually a\nsmaller branch that grew from the principal one. A nearly similar\ninstrument is used in Asia Minor to the present day, and is a curious\nrelic of the most ancient times of history, for we find on the\nEgyptian monuments figures of the various agricultural processes, in\nwhich the plough is made after this simple manner.\n\n [Illustration: \"It is good for a man to bear the yoke in his\n youth.\"--LAM. iii. 27.\n\n \"He maketh them also to skip like a calf.\"--PSALM xxix. 6.]\n\nOf course such an instrument is a very ineffective one, and can but\nscratch, rather than plough the ground, the warmth of the climate and\nfertility of the land rendering needless the deep ploughing of our own\ncountry, where the object is to turn up the earth to the greatest\npossible depth. One yoke of oxen was generally sufficient to draw a\nplough, but occasionally a much greater number were required. We read,\nfor example, of Elisha, who, when he received his call from Elijah,\nwas ploughing with twelve yoke of oxen, i.e. twenty-four. It has been\nsuggested, that the twelve yoke of oxen were not all attached to the\nsame plough, but that there were twelve ploughs, each with its single\nyoke of oxen. This, however, was scarcely likely to be the case,\nas it is definitely stated that Elisha \"was ploughing with\ntwelve yoke of oxen before him, and he with the twelfth,\" and it\nis much more probable that the land was heavy, and that, therefore,\nthe plough could not be properly worked without the additional force.\n\nThe instrument with which the cattle were driven was not a whip, but a\ngoad. This goad was a long and stout stick, armed with a spike at one\nend, and having a kind of spud at the other, with which the earth\ncould be scraped off the share when it became clogged. Such an\ninstrument might readily be used as a weapon, and, in the hands of a\npowerful man, might be made even more formidable than a spear. As a\nweapon, it often was used, as we see from many passages of the\nScriptures. For example, it is said in Judges iii. 31, \"that Shamgar\nthe son of Anath killed six hundred Philistines with an ox-goad.\"\n\nAfterwards, in the beginning of Saul's reign, when the Israelites\nfairly measured themselves against the Philistines, it was found that\nonly Saul and Jonathan were even tolerably armed. Fearful of the\nnumbers and spirit of the Israelites, the Philistines had disarmed\nthem, and were so cautious that they did not even allow them to\npossess forges wherewith to make or sharpen the various agricultural\ninstruments which they possessed, lest they should surreptitiously\nprovide themselves with weapons. The only smith's tool which they were\nallowed to retain was a file with which each man might trim the edges\nof the ploughshares, mattocks, axes, and sharpen the points of the\ngoad. The only weapons which they could muster were made of their\nagricultural implements, and among the most formidable of them was the\ngoad.\n\nHow the goad came into use in Palestine may easily be seen. The\nEgyptians, from among whom the people of Israel passed into the\nPromised Land, did not use the goad in ploughing, but the whip, which,\nfrom the representations on the Egyptian monuments, was identical with\nthe koorbash, or \"cow-hide\" whip, which is now in use in the same\ncountry. But this terrible whip, which is capable, when wielded by a\nskilful hand, of cutting deep grooves through the tough hide of the\nox, could not be obtained by the Jews, because the hippopotamus, of\nwhose hide it was made, did not live in or near Palestine. They\ntherefore were forced to use some other instrument wherewith to urge\non the oxen, and the goad was clearly the simplest and most effective\nimplement for this purpose.\n\nAfter the land was ploughed and sown, and the harvest was ripened, the\nlabours of the oxen were again called into requisition, first for\nthreshing out the corn, and next for carrying or drawing the grain to\nthe storehouses.\n\nIn the earlier days, the process of threshing was very simple. A\ncircular piece of ground was levelled, and beaten very hard and flat,\nits diameter being from fifty to a hundred feet. On this ground the\ncorn was thrown, and a number of oxen were driven here and there on\nit, so that the constant trampling of their feet shook the ripe grain\nout of the ears. The corn was gathered together in the middle of the\nfloor, and as fast as it was scattered by the feet of the oxen, it was\nthrown back towards the centre.\n\nAfterwards, an improvement was introduced in the form of a rough\nsledge, called \"moreg,\" to which the oxen were harnessed by a yoke,\nand on which the driver stood as he guided his team round the\nthreshing-floor. This instrument is mentioned in Isa. xli. 15:\n\"Behold, I will make thee anew and sharp threshing instrument having\nteeth [or mouths]: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them\nsmall, and shalt make the hills as chaff.\" Mention is also made of the\nsame implement in 2 Sam. xxiv. 22, where it is related that Araunah\nthe Jebusite offered to give David the oxen for a burnt-sacrifice, and\nthe moregs and other implements as wood with which they could be\nburned.\n\nThe work of treading out the corn was a hard and trying one for the\noxen, and it was probably on this account that the kindly edict was\nmade, that the oxen who trod out the corn should not be muzzled. As a\nrule, the cattle were not fed nearly as carefully as is done with us,\nand so the labours of the threshing-floor would find a compensation in\nthe temporary abundance of which the animals might take their fill.\n\nAfter the corn was threshed, or rather trodden out, the oxen had to\ndraw it home in carts. These were but slight improvements on the\nthreshing-sledge, and were simply trays or shallow boxes on a pair of\nwheels. As the wheels were merely slices cut from the trunk of a tree,\nand were not furnished with iron tires, they were not remarkable for\nroundness, and indeed, after a little time, were worn into rather\nirregular ovals, so that the task of dragging a cart over the rough\nroads was by no means an easy one. And, as the axle was simply a stout\npole fastened to the bottom of the cart, and having its rounded ends\nthrust through holes in the middle of the wheels, the friction was\nenormous. As, moreover, oil and grease were far too precious luxuries\nto be wasted in lubricating the axles, the creaking and groaning of\nthe wheels was a singularly disagreeable and ear-piercing sound.\n\n [Illustration: TREADING OUT CORN.\n\n \"_Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the\n corn._\"--(DEUT. xxv. 4.)]\n\nThe common hackery of India is a good example of the carts mentioned\nin the Scriptures. As with the plough, the cart was drawn by a couple\nof oxen, connected by the yoke. The two kinds of cart, namely, the\ntray and the box, are clearly indicated in the Scriptures. The new\ncart on which the Ark was placed when it was sent back by the\nPhilistines (see 1 Sam. vi. 7) was evidently one of the former kind,\nand so was that which was made twenty years afterwards, for the\npurpose of conveying the Ark to Jerusalem.\n\nThe second kind of cart is mentioned by the Prophet Amos (ch. ii. 13),\n\"Behold, I am pressed under you, as a cart is pressed that is full of\nsheaves,\" reference being evidently made to heaping up of the sheaves\nin the cart, and pressing them down, as is done at the present day.\n\nThat oxen were also employed as beasts of burden is shown by the\npassage in 1 Chron. xii. 40, \"Moreover, they that were nigh them, even\nunto Issachar, and Zebulun, and Napthali, brought bread on asses, and\non camels, and on mules, and on oxen.\"\n\nAlthough the cattle were evidently better tended in the olden times\nthan at present, those animals which were used for agriculture seem to\nhave passed rather a rough life, especially in the winter time. It is\nrather curious that the Jews should have had no idea of preserving the\ngrass by making it into hay, as is done in Europe. Consequently the\nchief food of the cattle was the straw and chaff which remained on the\nthreshing-floor after the grain had been separated. See Isa. xxx. 23:\n\"In that day shall thy cattle feed in large pastures. The oxen\nlikewise, and the young asses that ear the ground shall eat clean\nprovender, which hath been winnowed with the shovel and with the fan.\"\n\nThis, indeed, was the only use to which the straw could be put, for it\nwas so crushed and broken by the feet of the oxen and the\nthreshing-sledge that it was rendered useless. Allusion is made to the\ncrushing of the straw in many passages of Scripture. See, for example,\nIsa. xxv. 10, \"Moab shall be trodden down [or threshed] under him,\neven as straw is trodden down for the dunghill.\"\n\nThe want of winter forage is the chief reason why cattle are so\nirregularly disposed over Palestine, many parts of that country being\nentirely without them, and only those districts containing them in\nwhich fresh forage may be found throughout the year.\n\nExcept a few yoke of oxen, which are kept in order to draw carts, and\nact as beasts of burden, the cattle are turned loose for a\nconsiderable portion of the year, and run about in herds from one\npasturage to another. Thus they regain many of the characteristics of\nwild animals, and it is to this habit of theirs that many of the\nScriptural allusions can be traced.\n\nFor example, see Ps. xxii. 12, \"Many bulls have compassed me, strong\nbulls of Bashan have beset me round. They gaped on me with their\nmouths [or, their mouths opened against me] as a ravening and a\nroaring lion.\" This passage alludes to the curiosity inherent in\ncattle, which have a habit of following objects which they do not\nunderstand or dislike, and surrounding it with looks of grave\nwonderment. Even in their domesticated state this habit prevails. When\nI was a boy, I sometimes amused myself with going into a field where a\nnumber of cows and oxen were grazing, and lying down in the middle of\nit. The cattle would soon become uneasy, toss their heads about, and\ngradually draw near on every side, until at last they would be pressed\ntogether closely in a circle, with their heads just above the object\nof their astonishment. Their curious, earnest looks have always been\npresent to my mind when reading the above quoted passage.\n\nThe Psalmist does not necessarily mean that the bulls in question were\ndangerous animals. On the contrary, the bulls of Palestine are gentle\nin comparison with our own animals, which are too often made savage by\nconfinement and the harsh treatment to which they are subjected by\nrough and ignorant labourers. In Palestine a pair of bulls may\nconstantly be seen attached to the same yoke, a thing that never would\nbe seen in this country.\n\nThe custom of turning the herds of cattle loose to find pasture for\nthemselves is alluded to in Joel i. 18, \"How do the beasts groan! the\nherds of cattle are perplexed because they have no pasture.\" We can\neasily imagine to ourselves the terrible time to which the prophet\nrefers, \"when the rivers of waters are dried up, and the fire hath\ndevoured the pastures of the wilderness,\" as it is wont to do when a\nspark falls upon grass dried up and withered, by reason of the sun's\nheat and the lack of water. Over such a country, first withered by\ndrought, and then desolated by fire, would the cattle wander, vainly\nsearching on the dusty and blackened surface for the tender young\nblades which always spring up on a burnt pasture as soon as the first\nrains fall. Moaning and bellowing with thirst and disappointment,\nthey would vainly seek for food or water in places where the seed lies\nstill under the clods where it was sown (v. 17), where the vines are\ndried up, and the fig, the pomegranate and the palm (v. 12) are all\nwithered for want of moisture.\n\nSuch scenes are still to be witnessed in several parts of the world.\nSouthern Africa is sometimes sadly conspicuous for them, an\nexceptional season of drought keeping back the fresh grass after the\nold pastures have been burned (the ordinary mode of cultivating\npasture land). Then the vast herds of cattle, whose milk forms the\nstaff of life to the inhabitants, wander to and fro, gathering in\nmasses round any spot where a spring still yields a little water, and\nbellowing and moaning with thirst as they press their way towards the\nspot where their owners are doling out to each a small measure of the\npriceless fluid.\n\nThe cattle are branded with the mark of their owners, so that in these\nlarge herds there might be no difficulty in distinguishing them when\nthey were re-captured for the plough and the cart. On one of the\nEgyptian monuments there is a very interesting group, which has\nfurnished the idea for the plate which illustrates this article. It\noccurs in the tombs of the kings at Thebes, and represents a ploughing\nscene. The simple two-handled plough is being dragged by a pair of\ncows, who have the yoke fastened across the horns instead of lying on\nthe neck, and a sower is following behind, scattering the grain out of\na basket into the newly-made furrows. In front of the cows is a young\ncalf, which has run to meet its mother, and is leaping for joy before\nher as she steadily plods along her course.\n\nThe action of both animals is admirably represented; the steady and\nfirm gait of the mother contrasting with the light, gambolling step\nand arched tail of her offspring. Both are branded with the same mark,\nnamely, three equal-armed crosses, one on the haunch, another on the\nside, and a third on the neck. The driver carries the whip, or\nkoorbash, which has been already mentioned, and which is familiar to\ntravellers in Southern Africa under the title of \"sjambok.\"\n\nIn the olden times of the Israelitish race, herd-keeping was\nconsidered as an honourable occupation, in which men of the highest\nrank might engage without any derogation to their dignity. We find,\nfor instance, that Saul himself, even after he had been appointed\nking, was acting as herdsman when the people saw the mistake they had\nmade in rejecting him as their monarch, and came to fetch their\ndivinely-appointed leader from his retirement. (See 1 Sam. xi. 5.)\nDoeg, too, the faithful companion of Saul, was made the chief herdsman\nof his master's cattle, so that for Saul to confer such an office, and\nDoeg to accept it, shows that the post was one of much honour. And\nafterwards, when David was in the zenith of his power, he completed\nthe organization of his kingdom, portioning out not only his army into\nbattalions, and assigning a commanding officer to each battalion, but\nalso appointing a ruler to each tribe, and setting officers over his\ntreasury, over the vineyards, over the olive-trees, over the\nstorehouses, and over the cattle. And these offices were so important\nthat the names of their holders are given at length in 1 Chron. xxvii.\nthose of the various herdsmen being thought as worthy of mention as\nthose of the treasurers, the military commanders, or the headmen of\nthe tribes.\n\nBefore concluding this necessarily short account of the domesticated\noxen of Palestine, it will be needful to give a few lines to the\nanimal viewed in a religious aspect. Here we have, in bold contrast to\neach other, the divine appointment of certain cattle to be slain as\nsacrifices, and the reprobation of worship paid to those very cattle\nas living emblems of divinity. This false worship was learned by the\nIsraelites during their long residence in Egypt, and so deeply had the\ncustoms of the Egyptian religion sunk into their hearts, that they\nwere not eradicated after the lapse of centuries. It may easily be\nimagined that such a superstition, surrounded as it was with every\nexternal circumstance which could make it more imposing, would take a\npowerful hold of the Jewish mind.\n\nChief among the multitude of idols or symbols was the god Apis,\nrepresented by a bull. Many other animals, specially the cat and the\nibis, were deeply honoured among the ancient Egyptians, as we learn\nfrom their own monuments and from the works of the old historians. All\nthese creatures were symbols as well as idols, symbols to the educated\nand idols to the ignorant.\n\nNone of them was held in such universal honour as the bull Apis. The\nparticular animal which represented the deity, and which was lodged\nwith great state and honour in his temple at Memphis, was thought to\nbe divinely selected for the purpose, and to be impressed with certain\nmarks. His colour must be black, except a square spot on the forehead,\na crescent-shaped white spot on the right side, and the figure of an\neagle on his back. Under the tongue must be a knob shaped like the\nsacred scarab\u00e6us, and the hairs of his tail must be double.\n\nThis representative animal was only allowed to live for a certain\ntime, and when he had reached this allotted period, he was taken in\nsolemn procession to the Nile, and drowned in its sacred waters. His\nbody was then embalmed, and placed with great state in the tombs at\nMemphis.\n\nAfter his death, whether natural or not, the whole nation went into\nmourning, and exhibited all the conventional signs of sorrow, until\nthe priests found another bull which possessed the distinctive marks.\nThe people then threw off their mourning robes, and appeared in their\nbest attire, and the sacred bull was exhibited in state for forty days\nbefore he was taken to his temple at Memphis. The reader will here\nremember the analogous case of the Indian cattle, some of which are\nheld to be little less than incarnations of divinity.\n\nEven at the very beginning of the exodus, when their minds must have\nbeen filled with the many miracles that had been wrought in their\nbehalf, and with the cloud and fire of Sinai actually before their\neyes, Aaron himself made an image of a calf in gold, and set it up as\na symbol of the Lord. That the idol in question was intended as a\nsymbol by Aaron is evident from the words which he used when summoning\nthe people to worship, \"To-morrow is a feast of the Lord\" (Gen. xxxii.\n5). The people, however, clearly lacked the power of discriminating\nbetween the symbol and that which it represented, and worshipped the\nimage just as any other idol might be worshipped. And, in spite of the\nterrible and swift punishment that followed, and which showed the\nprofanity of the act, the idea of ox-worship still remained among the\npeople.\n\nFive hundred years afterwards we find a familiar example of it in the\nconduct of Jeroboam, \"who made Israel to sin,\" the peculiar crime\nbeing the open resuscitation of ox-worship. \"The king made two calves\nof gold and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to\nJerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of\nthe land of Egypt. And he set the one in Bethel, and the other put he\nin Dan.... And he made an house of high places, and made priests of\nthe lowest of the people, which were not of the tribe of Levi. And\nJeroboam ordained a feast ... like unto the feast in Judah, and he\noffered upon the altar. So did he in Bethel, sacrificing unto the\ncalves that he had made.\"\n\nHere we have a singular instance of a king of Israel repeating, after\na lapse of five hundred years, the very acts which had drawn down on\nthe people so severe a punishment, and which were so contrary to the\nlaw that they had incited Moses to fling down and break the sacred\ntables on which the commandments had been divinely inscribed. Nothing\nis omitted: the shape of the idol, the material of which it is\ncomposed, the offerings, and the very words in which Aaron had so\ndeeply sinned, \"Behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out\nof the land of Egypt.\" Successive monarchs followed his example, and,\naccording to the graphic words of Scripture, they \"departed not from\nthe ways of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin.\"\n\nAs was likely to be the case in a land where cattle were of such\nimportance, and often formed the principal wealth of the inhabitants,\nmany words were in use to distinguish the cattle according to sex,\nage, and number. Thus, Bakar signifies the adult animal of either sex,\nthe test of full growth being fitness for the plough. Consequently,\nBen-Baka, or son of the herd, signifies a male calf, and Aiglah-Bakar,\na female calf. The term Bakar is derived from a Hebrew word signifying\nto cleave or plough, and hence it is used as to signify those animals\nwhich are old enough to be put to the plough.\n\nThen there is the word Shor, or Tor, to signify a single head of\ncattle, of any age, or of either sex. The second form of this word is\nfamiliar to us in the Latin word \"taurus,\" and the English \"steer.\"\nThere are several other words, such as Par, a young bull, and Parah, a\nheifer, which do not need explanation.\n\n\nAnother species of the ox-tribe now inhabits Palestine, though\ncommentators rather doubt whether it is not a comparatively late\nimportation. This is the true BUFFALO (_Bubalus buffelus_, Gray),\nwhich is spread over a very large portion of the earth, and is very\nplentiful in India. In that country there are two distinct breeds of\nthe Buffalo, namely, the Arnee, a wild variety, and the Bhainsa, a\ntamed variety. The former animal is much larger than the latter, being\nsometimes more than ten feet in length from the nose to the root of\nthe tail, and measuring between six and seven feet in height at the\nshoulder. Its horns are of enormous length, the tail is very short,\nand tufts of hair grow on the forehead and horns. The tamed variety is\nat least one-third smaller, and, unlike the Arnee, never seems to get\ninto high condition. It is an ugly, ungainly kind of beast, and is\nrendered very unprepossessing to the eye by the bald patches which are\nmostly found upon its hide.\n\n [Illustration: THE BUFFALO.]\n\nBeing a water-loving animal, the Buffalo always inhabits the low-lying\ndistricts, and is fond of wallowing in the oozy marshes in which it\nremains for hours, submerged all but its head, and tranquilly chewing\nthe cud while enjoying its mud-bath. While thus engaged the animal\ndepresses its horns so that they are scarcely visible, barely allowing\nmore than its eyes, ears, and nostrils to remain above the surface, so\nthat the motionless heads are scarcely distinguishable from the grass\nand reed tufts which stud the marshes. Nothing is more startling to an\ninexperienced traveller than to pass by a silent and tranquil pool\nwhere the muddy surface is unbroken except by a number of black lumps\nand rushy tufts, and then to see these tufts suddenly transformed into\ntwenty or thirty huge beasts rising out of the still water as if by\nmagic. Generally, the disturber of their peace had better make the\nbest of his way out of their reach, as the Buffalo, whether wild or\ntame, is of a tetchy and irritable nature, and resents being startled\nout of its state of dreamy repose.\n\nIn the Jordan valley the Buffalo is found, and is used for\nagriculture, being of the Bhainsa, or domesticated variety. Being much\nlarger and stronger than the ordinary cattle, it is useful in drawing\nthe plough, but its temper is too uncertain to render it a pleasant\nanimal to manage. As is the case with all half-wild cattle, its milk\nis very scanty, but compensates by the richness of the quality for the\nlack of quantity.\n\n\n\n\nTHE WILD BULL.\n\n The T\u00f4, Wild Bull of the Old Testament--Passages in which it is\n mentioned--The Wild Bull in the net--Hunting with nets in the\n East--The Oryx supposed to be the T\u00f4 of Scripture--Description\n of the Oryx, its locality, appearance, and habits--The points in\n which the Oryx agrees with the T\u00f4--The \"snare\" in which the foot\n is taken, as distinguished from the net.\n\n\nIn two passages of the Old Testament an animal is mentioned,\nrespecting which the translators and commentators have been somewhat\nperplexed, in one passage being translated as the \"Wild Ox,\" and in\nthe other as the \"Wild Bull.\" In the Jewish Bible the same rendering\nis preserved, but the sign of doubt is added to the word in both\ncases, showing that the translation is an uncertain one.\n\nThe first of these passages occurs in Deut. xiv. 5, where it is\nclassed together with the ox, sheep, goats, and other ruminants, as\none of the beasts which were lawful for food. Now, although we cannot\nidentify it by this passage, we can at all events ascertain two\nimportant points--the first, that it was a true ruminant, and the\nsecond, that it was not the ox, the sheep, or the goat. It was,\ntherefore, some wild ruminant, and we now have to ask how we are to\nfind out the species.\n\nIf we turn to Isa. li. 20, we shall find a passage which will help us\nconsiderably. Addressing Jerusalem, the prophet uses these words, \"By\nwhom shall I comfort thee? Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head\nof all the streets, as a wild bull in a net; they are full of the fury\nof the Lord, the rebuke of thy God.\" We now see that the T\u00f4 or Te\u00f4\nmust be an animal which is captured by means of nets, and therefore\nmust inhabit spots wherein the toils can be used. Moreover, it is\nevidently a powerful animal, or the force of the simile would be lost.\nThe prophet evidently refers to some large and strong beast which has\nbeen entangled in the hunter's nets, and which lies helplessly\nstruggling in them. We are, therefore, almost perforce driven to\nrecognise it as some large antelope.\n\nThe expression used by the prophet is so characteristic that it needs\na short explanation. In this country, and at the present day, the use\nof the net is almost entirely restricted to fishing and bird-catching;\nbut in the East nets are still employed in the capture of very large\ngame.\n\nA brief allusion to the hunting-net is made at page 27, but, as the\npassage in Isaiah li. requires a more detailed account of this mode of\ncatching large animals, it will be as well to describe the sport as at\npresent practised in the East.\n\nWhen a king or some wealthy man determines to hunt game without taking\nmuch trouble himself, he gives orders to his men to prepare their\nnets, which vary in size or strength according to the particular\nanimal for which they are intended. If, for example, only the wild\nboar and similar animals are to be hunted, the nets need not be of\nvery great width; but for agile creatures, such as the antelope, they\nmust be exceedingly wide, or the intended prey will leap over them. As\nthe net is much used in India for the purpose of catching game,\nCaptain Williamson's description of it will explain many of the\npassages of Scripture wherein it is mentioned.\n\nThe material of the net is hemp, twisted loosely into a kind of rope,\nand the mode in which it is formed is rather peculiar. The meshes are\nnot knotted together, but only twisted round each other, much after\nthe fashion of the South American hammocks, so as to obtain\nconsiderable elasticity, and to prevent a powerful animal from\nsnapping the cord in its struggles. Some of these nets are thirteen\nfeet or more in width, and even such a net as this has been overleaped\nby a herd of antelopes. Their length is variable, but, as they can be\njoined in any number when set end to end, the length is not so\nimportant as the width.\n\nThe mode of setting the nets is singularly ingenious. When a suitable\nspot has been selected, the first care of the hunters is to stretch a\nrope as tightly as possible along the ground. For this purpose stout\nwooden stakes or truncheons are sunk crosswise in the earth, and\nbetween these the rope is carefully strained. The favourite locality\nof the net is a ravine, through which the animals can be driven so as\nto run against the net in their efforts to escape, and across the\nravine a whole row of these stakes is sunk. The net is now brought to\nthe spot, and its lower edge fastened strongly to the ground rope.\n\nThe strength of this mode of fastening is astonishing, and, although\nthe stakes are buried scarcely a foot below the surface, they cannot\nbe torn up by any force which can be applied to them; and, however\nstrong the rope may be, it would be broken before the stakes could be\ndragged out of the ground.\n\nA smaller rope is now attached to the upper edge of the net, which is\nraised upon a series of slight poles. It is not stretched quite\ntightly, but droops between each pair of poles, so that a net which is\nsome thirteen feet in width will only give nine or ten feet of clear\nheight when the upper edge is supported on the poles. These latter are\nnot fixed in the ground, but merely held in their places by the weight\nof the net resting upon them.\n\nWhen the nets have been properly set, the beaters make a wide circuit\nthrough the country, gradually advancing towards the fatal spot, and\ndriving before them all the wild animals that inhabit the\nneighbourhood. As soon as any large beast, such, for example, as an\nantelope, strikes against the net, the supporting pole falls, and the\nnet collapses upon the unfortunate animal, whose struggles--especially\nif he be one of the horned animals--only entangle him more and more in\nthe toils.\n\nAs soon as the hunters see a portion of the net fall, they run to the\nspot, kill the helpless creature that lies enveloped in the elastic\nmeshes, drag away the body, and set up the net again in readiness for\nthe next comer. Sometimes the line of nets will extend for half a mile\nor more, and give employment to a large staff of hunters, in killing\nthe entangled animals, and raising afresh those portions of the net\nwhich had fallen.\n\nAllusions to this mode of hunting are plentiful in the Old Testament.\nTake, for example, Job xviii. 7: \"The steps of his strength shall be\nstraitened, and his own counsel shall cast him down; for he is cast\ninto a net by his own feet, and he walketh upon a snare.\" And again in\nthe next chapter, ver. 6, \"Know now that God hath overthrown me, and\nhath compassed me with His net,\" in which is depicted forcibly the\nhelpless state of one on whom the net has fallen, and who is lying on\nthe ground vainly struggling in the meshes.\n\nSee also Ps. lvii. 6, \"They have prepared a net for my steps, my soul\nis bowed down;\" and Ps. lxvi. 11, \"Thou broughtest us into the net,\nthou laidest affliction upon our loins.\" In the prophet Ezekiel are\nseveral passages which refer to the hunting net, and make especial\nmention of the manner in which it falls over its victim. One of these\noccurs in chap. xii. 13, \"My net also will I spread upon him, and he\nshall be taken in my snare.\" Again in chap. xix. 8, \"Then the nations\nset against him on every side from the provinces, and spread their net\nover him\" In this passage a forcible allusion is made to the manner in\nwhich the wild animal is surrounded by the hunters, who surround and\ngradually close in upon them, as they drive their victims into the\ntoils. The same combination of the hunters is also referred to by the\nprophet Micah, vii. 2, \"There is none upright among men: they all lie\nin wait for blood; they hunt every man his brother with a net.\"\n\n [Illustration: WILD BULL, OR ORYX.\n\n \"_They lie at the head of all the streets, like a wild bull in a\n net._\"--ISAIAH li. 21.]\n\nAccepting the theory that the T\u00f4 is one of the large antelopes that\ninhabit, or used to inhabit, the Holy Land and its neighbourhood, we\nmay safely conjecture that it may signify the beautiful animal known\nas the ORYX (_Oryx leucoryx_), an animal which has a tolerably wide\nrange, and is even now found on the borders of the Holy Land. It is a\nlarge and powerful antelope, and is remarkable for its beautiful\nhorns, which sometimes exceed a yard in length, and sweep in a most\ngraceful curve over the back.\n\nSharp as they are, and evidently formidable weapons, the manner in\nwhich they are set on the head renders them apparently unserviceable\nfor combat. When, however, the Oryx is brought to bay, or wishes to\nfight, it stoops its head until the nose is close to the ground, the\npoints of the horns being thus brought to the front. As the head is\nswung from side to side, the curved horns sweep through a considerable\nspace, and are so formidable that even the lion is chary of attacking\ntheir owner. Indeed, instances are known where the lion has been\ntransfixed and killed by the horns of the Oryx. Sometimes the animal\nis not content with merely standing to repel the attacks of its\nadversaries, but suddenly charges forward with astonishing rapidity,\nand strikes upwards with its horns as it makes the leap.\n\nBut these horns, which can be used with such terrible effect in\nbattle, are worse than useless when the animal is hampered in the net.\nIn vain does the Oryx attempt its usual defence: the curved horns get\nmore and more entangled in the elastic meshes, and become a source of\nweakness rather than strength. We see now how singularly appropriate\nis the passage, \"Thy sons lie at the heads of all the streets, as a\nwild bull (or Oryx) in a net,\" and how completely the force of the\nmetaphor is lost without a knowledge of the precise mode of fixing the\nnets, of driving the animals into them, and of the manner in which\nthey render even the large and powerful animals helpless.\n\nThe height of the Oryx at the shoulder is between three and four feet,\nand its colour is greyish white, mottled profusely with black and\nbrown in bold patches. It is plentiful in Northern Africa, and, like\nmany other antelopes, lives in herds, so that it is peculiarly suited\nto that mode of hunting which consists in surrounding a number of\nanimals, and driving them into a trap of some kind, whether a fenced\nenclosure, a pitfall, or a net.\n\nThere is, by the way, the term \"snare,\" which is specially used with\nespecial reference to catching the foot as distinguished from the net\nwhich enveloped the whole body. For example, in Job xviii. 8, \"He is\ncast into a net, he walketh on a snare,\" where a bold distinction is\ndrawn between the two and their mode of action. And in ver. 10, \"The\nsnare is laid for him in the ground.\" Though I would not state\ndefinitely that such is the case, I believe that the snare which is\nhere mentioned is one which is still used in several parts of the\nworld.\n\nIt is simply a hoop, to the inner edge of which are fastened a number\nof elastic spikes, the points being directed towards the centre. This\nis merely laid in the path which the animal will take, and is tied by\na short cord to a log of wood. As the deer or antelope treads on the\nsnare, the foot passes easily through the elastic spikes, but, when\nthe foot is raised, the spikes run into the joint and hold the hoop\nupon the limb. Terrified by the check and the sudden pang, the animal\ntries to run away, but, by the united influence of sharp spikes and\nthe heavy log, it is soon forced to halt, and so becomes an easy prey\nto its pursuers.\n\n\n\n\nTHE RE\u00caM, OR \"UNICORN\" OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The Re\u00eam evidently known to the Jews--Various theories\n concerning the Unicorn--Supposed identity with the Indian\n Rhinoceros--Passages of Scripture alluding to the strength,\n violent and intractable temper of the Re\u00eam--The Re\u00eam a\n two-horned animal--Its evident connection with the Ox tribe--Its\n presumed identity with the now extinct Urus--Mr. Dawkins'\n treatise on the Urus--Enormous size and dangerous character of\n the Urus--Rabbinical legend of the Re\u00eam--Identity of the Urus\n with the modern varieties of cattle--The Bull hunts of Nineveh.\n\n\nThere are many animals mentioned in the Scriptures which cannot be\nidentified with any certainty, partly because their names occur only\nonce or twice in the sacred writings, and partly because, when they\nare mentioned, the context affords no clue to their identity by giving\nany hint as to their appearance or habits. In such cases, although the\ntranslators would have done better if they had simply given the Hebrew\nword without endeavouring to identify it with any known animal, they\nmay be excused for committing errors in their nomenclature. There is\none animal, however, for which no such excuse can be found, and this\nis the Re\u00eam of Scripture, translated as Unicorn in the authorized\nversion.\n\nNow the word Re\u00eam is mentioned seven times in the Old Testament, and\nis found, not in one, but several books, showing that it was an animal\nperfectly well known to those for whom the sacred books were written.\nIt is twice mentioned in the Pentateuch, several times in the Psalms,\nonce in the book of Job, once by Isaiah, and reference is once made to\nit in the historical books. In these various passages, abundant\ndetails are given of its aspect and habits, so that there is very\nlittle doubt as to the identity of the animal.\n\nThe Septuagint translates Re\u00eam by the word Monoceros, or the\nOne-horned, which has been transferred to the Vulgate by the term\nUnicornis, a word having the same signification.\n\nIn an age when scientific investigation was utterly neglected, such a\ntranslation would readily be accepted without cavil, and there is no\ndoubt that the generality of those who read the passages in question\naccepted them as referring to the Unicorn of heraldry with which we,\nas Englishmen, are so familiar. I may perhaps mention briefly that\nsuch an animal is a physiological impossibility, and that the Unicorn\nof the fables was a mere compound of an antelope, a horse, and a\nnarwhal. The tusks or teeth of the narwhal were in former days\nexhibited as horns of the Unicorn, and so precious were they that one\nof them was laid up in the cathedral of St. Denis, and two in the\ntreasury of St. Mark's at Venice, all of which were exhibited in the\nyear 1658 as veritable Unicorns' horns.\n\nThe physiological difficulty above mentioned seems to have troubled\nthe minds of the old writers, who saw that an ivory horn had no\nbusiness to grow upon the junction of the two bones of the skull, and\nyet felt themselves bound to acknowledge that such an animal did\nreally exist. They therefore put themselves to vast trouble in\naccounting for such a phenomenon, and, in their determination to\nbelieve in the animal, invented theories nearly as wonderful as the\nexistence of the Unicorn itself.\n\nOne of these theories, arguing that the two horns may be as easily\nfused together as the hoofs, is stated as follows. \"Because the middle\nis equally distant from both the extremes; and the hoof of this beast\nmay be well said to be cloven and whole, because the horn is of the\nsubstance of the hoof, and the hoof of the substance of the horn, and\ntherefore the horn is whole and the hoof cloven; for the cleaving\neither of the horn or of the hoof cometh from the defect of nature,\nand therefore God hath given to horses and asses whole hoofs, because\nthere is greatest use of their legs, but unto Unicorns a whole and\nentire horn, that, as the ease of man is procured by the help of\nhorses, so the health of them is procured by the horn of the Unicorn.\"\n\nThis last sentence refers to the then universal belief, that the horn\nof the Unicorn was a panacea for all illness and an antidote to all\npoisons. It was thought to be so sensitive, that if a poisoned cup\nwere but brought near it a thick moisture would exude from its\nsurface, and if fragments were thrown into the cup they would cause\nthe liquid to swell and bubble, and at last to boil over. This\nsupposed virtue forms the basis of an argument used by one of the\nwriters on the subject, and, as the passage affords a good example of\ntheological argument in 1658, it will be given entire.\n\nAfter enumerating various animals (and, by the way, once actually\nhitting upon the \"fish called Monoceros,\" _i.e._ the narwhal), the\nwriter proceeds as follows, in the quaint and nervous English of his\ntime: \"Now our discourse of the Unicorn is of none of these beasts,\nfor there is not any virtue attributed to their horns, and therefore\nthe vulgar sort of infidel people, which scarcely believe any herb but\nsuch as they see in their own gardens, or any beast but such as is in\ntheir own flocks, or any knowledge but such as is bred in their own\nbrains, or any birds which are not hatched in their own nests, have\nnever made question of these; but of the true Unicorn, whereof there\nwere more proofs in the world, because of the nobleness of his horn,\nthey have ever been in doubt. By which distinction it appeareth unto\nme that there is some secret enemy in the inward degenerate nature of\nman, which continually blindeth the eyes of God His people, from\nbeholding and believing the greatness of God His works.\n\n\"But to the purpose: that there is such a beast, the Scripture itself\nwitnesseth, for _David_ thus speaketh in the 92d Psalm, _Et erigetur\ncornu meus tanquam Monocerotis_. That is, 'My horn shall be lifted up\nlike the horn of a Unicorn.' Whereupon all divines that ever wrote\nhave not only collected that there is a Unicorn, but also affirm the\nsimilitude to be betwixt the kingdom of _David_ and the horn of the\nUnicorn, that as the horn of the Unicorn is wholesome to all beasts\nand creatures, so should be the kingdom of David to the generation of\nChrist.\n\n\"And do we think that _David_ would compare the vertue of his kingdom\nand the powerful redemption of the world, unto a thing that is not, or\nis uncertain, or is fantastical? God forbid that ever any man should\nso do despight to the Holy Ghost. For this cause we read also in\n_Suidas_, that good men who worship God and follow His laws are\ncompared to Unicorns, whose greater parts, as their whole bodies, are\nunprofitable and untameable, yet their horn maketh them excellent; so\nin good men, although their fleshy parts be good for nothing, and fall\ndown to the earth, yet their grace and piety exalteth their souls to\nthe heavens.\"\n\nIn late years, after the true origin of the Unicorn's horn was\ndiscovered, and the belief in its many virtues abandoned, the Re\u00eam, or\nMonoceros, was almost unhesitatingly identified with the rhinoceros of\nIndia, and for a long time this theory was the accepted one. It is\nnow, however, certain that the Re\u00eam was not the rhinoceros, and that\nit can be almost certainly identified with an animal which, at the\ntime when the passages in question were written, was plentiful in\nPalestine, although, like the lion, it is now extinct.\n\nWe will now take in their order the seven passages in which the animal\nis mentioned, substituting the word Re\u00eam for Unicorn.\n\nThe first of these passages occurs in Numbers xxiii., where the\nremarkable prophecies of Balaam are recorded. \"The Lord his God is\nwith them, and the shout of a king is among them. God brought them out\nof Egypt, he hath as it were the strength of Re\u00eam:\" (ver. 21, 22).\nFrom this passage we gain one piece of information, namely, that the\nRe\u00eam was an exceptionally powerful animal. Indeed, it was evidently\nthe strongest animal that was known to the prophet and his hearers, or\nit would not have been mentioned as a visible type of Divine power.\n\nNext we come to Deut. xxxiii., wherein another prophecy is revealed,\nnamely, that of Moses, just before his death and mysterious burial.\nSpeaking of Joseph and his tribe, the aged prophet uses these words,\n\"Let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of\nthe head of him that was separated from his brethren. His glory is\nlike the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of\nRe\u00eam: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the\nearth; and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the\nthousands of Manasseh\" (ver. 16, 17).\n\nIn this passage we gather more information. In the first place it is\nto be noticed that the Re\u00eam is mentioned in connexion with the\ndomestic cattle, and that the name is used as one that is familiar to\nthe hearers. Next, as the marginal reading gives the word, Re\u00eam is\nused in the singular and not in the plural number, so that the passage\nmay be read, \"his horns are like the horns of a Unicorn.\" Thus we come\nto the important point that the Re\u00eam was not a one-horned, but a\ntwo-horned animal.\n\nIt may here be remarked that the Re\u00eam horns were the emblem of the two\ntribes that sprung from Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, himself being\ntypified by the Re\u00eam, and his two powerful sons by the horns.\n\nNext, in the Psalms, we find that the powerful, two-horned Re\u00eam was\nalso a dangerous and violent animal. (See Psa. xxii. 19, 21.)\n\n\"Be not Thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste Thee to help\nme.\n\n\"Deliver my soul from the sword, my darling from the power (or the\nhand) of the dog.\n\n\"Save me from the lion's mouth: for Thou hast heard me from the horns\nof Re\u00eam.\"\n\nIn Ps. xcii. there is another allusion to the powerful horns of the\nRe\u00eam. \"For lo, Thine enemies, O Lord, for lo, Thine enemies shall\nperish; all the workers of iniquity shall be scattered. But my horn\nshalt Thou exalt like the horn of Re\u00eam.\"\n\nFrom these passages we gather the following important points. First,\nthe Re\u00eam was an animal familiar to the people of Palestine, as is\nevident from the manner in which its name is introduced into the\nsacred writings; secondly, it was the most powerful animal known to\nthe Israelites; thirdly, it was a two-horned animal; fourthly, it was\na savage and dangerous beast; and fifthly, it had some connexion with\nthe domesticated cattle.\n\nThis last-mentioned point is brought out more strongly in the\nremaining passages of Scripture. In Job, for example, a parallel is\ndrawn between the wild and untameable Re\u00eam and the beasts of draught\nand burden.\n\nIn that magnificent series of passages in which the Lord answers Job\nout of the whirlwind, and which indeed are a worthy sequel to Elihu's\nimpassioned discourse on the text that \"God is greater than man,\" the\nwild animals are mentioned in evident contrast to the tame. First come\nthe wild goats of the rock; then the wild ass, who \"scorneth the\nmultitude of the city, neither regardeth the crying of the driver;\"\nand then the Re\u00eam, which is clearly contrasted with the tamed ox.\n\n\"Will Re\u00eam be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou\nbind Re\u00eam with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys\nafter thee? Wilt thou trust him, because his strength is great? or\nwilt thou leave thy labour to him? Wilt thou believe him that he will\nbring home thy seed, and gather it in thy barn?\" See chap. xxxix.\n9-12.\n\nNow in these passages, the principal duties of the domesticated cattle\nare described--the ploughing the furrow, the drawing of the harrow,\nand the carrying home of the ripened corn, for all which purposes the\ntameless spirit of Re\u00eam renders him useless, in spite of his vast\nstrength. The prophet Isaiah has a passage in which the Re\u00eam is\nevidently classed with the ox tribe. See chap. xxxiv. 6, 7.\n\n\"The sword of the Lord is filled with blood; it is made fat with\nfatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the fat of the\nkidneys of rams: for the Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great\nslaughter in the land of Idumea. And Re\u00eam shall come down with them,\nand the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with\nblood, and their dust made fat with fatness.\"\n\nThe last passage in which reference is made to this animal is in Ps.\nxxix. 5, 6.\n\n\"The voice of the Lord breaketh the cedars; yea, the Lord breaketh the\ncedars of Lebanon. He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon\nand Sirion like a young Re\u00eam.\"\n\nOn turning to the Jewish Bible we find that the word Re\u00eam is\ntranslated as buffalo, and there is no doubt that this rendering is\nnearly the correct one, and at the present day naturalists are nearly\nall agreed that the Re\u00eam of the Old Testament must have been the now\nextinct Urus. A smaller animal, the Bonassus or Bison, also existed\nin Palestine, and even to the present day continues to maintain itself\nin one or two spots, though it will probably be as soon completely\nerased from the surface of the earth as its gigantic congener.\n\nThat the Re\u00eam was one of the two animals is certain, and that it was\nthe larger is nearly as certain. The reason for deciding upon the Urus\nis, that its horns were of great size and strength, and therefore\nagree with the description of the Re\u00eam; whereas those of the Bonassus,\nalthough powerful, are short, and not conspicuous enough to deserve\nthe notice which is taken of them by the sacred writers.\n\nOf the extinct variety we know but little. We do know, however, that\nit was a huge and most formidable animal, as is evident from the\nskulls and other bones which have been discovered.\n\nHitherto there has been considerable difficulty in treating of the\nancient Urus, on account of the great confusion which existed in the\nvarious synonyms that were given to the animal. The tangled skein has,\nhowever, been carefully unravelled by Mr. W. Boyd Dawkins, M.A.,\nF.R.S., who has published an exceedingly valuable paper on the subject\nin the _Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society_, March 21, 1866.\n\nAfter describing the general character of the Urus, he proceeds to\nremark: \"The synonyms of the _Bos Urus_ are in a state of very great\nconfusion, arising from the fact that the two words denoting two\ndistinct species, the Urox and the Aurochs, are derived from the same\nSanscrit root, _Ur_, _Aur_, or _Or_, that signifies a forest, or sandy\nwaste. The root can be traced through many languages, and still\nsurvives in the Greek [Greek: _horos_] (a mountain), the Norwegian\n_Ore_, the Icelandic _Ure_ (the stony desert surrounding the base of\nthe mountains); and is preserved without change in the old German _Ur_\n(a forest), and in _Ur_ of the Chaldees. It appears also in the Ural\nMountains, and also in the canton of _Uri_, the crest of which is an\nox-head.\" It is worthy of mention that, in the last-mentioned place,\nwhen new magistrates are elected, two ancient and gigantic horns,\nremarkable for their double curvature, are carried in solemn\nprocession.\n\nThe presence of these horns affords a remarkable confirmation to a\nwell-known passage in Julius C\u00e6sars familiar \"Commentaries.\" \"The Uri\nare little inferior to elephants in size\" (\"magnitudine paullo infra\nelephantos\"); \"but are bulls in their nature, colour, and figure.\nGreat is their strength, and great their swiftness; nor do they spare\nman or beast when they have caught sight of them. These, when trapped\nin pitfalls, the hunters diligently kill. The youths, exercising\nthemselves by this sort of hunting, are hardened by the toil; and\nthose among them who have killed most, bringing with them the horns as\ntestimonials, acquire great praise. But these Uri cannot be habituated\nto man or made tractable, not even when young. The great size of the\nhorns, as well as the form and quality of them, differ much from the\nhorns of our oxen. These, when carefully selected, they ring round the\nedge with silver, and use them for drinking cups at their ample\nfeasts.\"\n\nThe enormous size of the horns of an ox which was in all probability\nthe Urus is mentioned by another writer, who also alludes to their use\nas drinking vessels. He states that some of these horns were so large\nas to hold about four gallons, and then proceeds to remark that their\nprimitive use as drinking-cups was the reason why Bacchus was\nrepresented as wearing horns, and was sometimes worshipped under the\nform of a bull.\n\nIt is worthy of notice, that the Sanscrit root _Ur_ is retained in the\nname of the enormous Indian ox, the Gaur, a term which is formed from\ntwo words, namely, Gau, or Ghoo, a cow, and Ur, so that the name\nsignifies Wild Cow.\n\nAs to the size of the animal Urus, it is evident, by measurement of\ncertain remains, that it must have well deserved C\u00e6sar's comparison\nwith the elephant. A skull that is described by Cuvier gave the\nfollowing measurements. Width of skull between the bases of the\nhorn-cores (_i.e._ the bony projections on which the hollow horns are\nset), rather more than twelve inches and an half. Circumference of the\ncores at the base, twelve inches and nine-tenths. Length of the cores,\ntwenty-seven inches and nine-tenths; and distances between their tips,\nthirty-two inches and a half.\n\nAccording to the proportions of the domesticated ox, these\nmeasurements indicated that the animal was twelve feet in length, and\nsix feet and a half in height. Now, if the reader will sketch out on a\nwall an ox of these dimensions, he will appreciate the enormous\ndimensions of the ancient Urus, far better than can be done by merely\nreading figures in a book.\n\nBut this animal, gigantic as it was, is not the largest specimen that\nhas been discovered. A portion of an Urus skull was discovered in the\nAvon, at Melksham, near Bath, the horn-cores of which, as described by\nMr. H. Woods, were seventeen inches and a half in circumference,\nthirty-six inches and a half in length, and the distance from tip to\ntip was thirty-nine inches. Taking the same proportions as those of\nthe ordinary ox, the author shows that the skull in question belonged\nto an animal very much larger than that which was described by Cuvier.\nIn another specimen the distance between the tips of the horn-cores\nwas forty-two inches, but their length only thirty-six.\n\nOf course, the size of the horn-cores gives little indication of the\ndimensions of the horns themselves, and the principal point to be\nnoticed is the shape of the core, which in some specimens, though not\nin all, instead of presenting the regular double curvature with which\nwe are so familiar in our domestic oxen, first curves outwards, then\nbends backwards or a little downwards and forwards. This peculiarity\nin the shape of the horns is specially noted by C\u00e6sar, and we may\ntherefore receive with more security his account of their enormous\nsize.\n\nA curious rabbinical legend of the Re\u00eam is given in Lewysohn's\n\"Zoologie des Talmuds.\" When the ark was complete, and all the beasts\nwere commanded to enter, the Re\u00eam was unable to do so, because it was\ntoo large to pass through the door. Noah and his sons therefore were\nobliged to tie the animal by a rope to the ark, and to tow it behind;\nand, in order to prevent it from being strangled, they tied the rope,\nnot round its neck, but to its horn.\n\nThe same writer very justly remarks that the Scriptural and Talmudical\naccounts of the Re\u00eam have one decided distinction. The Scripture\nspeaks chiefly of its fierceness, its untameable nature, its strength,\nand its swiftness, as its principal characteristics, while the Talmud\nspeaks almost exclusively of its size. It was evidently the largest\nanimal of which the writers had ever heard, and, according to Oriental\nwont, they exaggerated it preposterously. Whenever the Talmudical\nwriters treat of animals with which they are personally acquainted,\nthey are simple, straightforward, and accurate. But, as soon as they\ncome to animals unknown to them except by hearsay, they go off into\nthe wildest extravagances, such, for example, as asserting that the\nleopard is a hybrid between the wild boar and the lioness. The\nexaggerated statements concerning the Re\u00eam show therefore that the\nanimal must have been extinct long before the time of the writers.\n\nThe question now arises, What is the distinction between the ancient\nUrus and our modern cattle? The answer is simple enough. The\ndifference in the shape of the horn-cores is, as has been shown, not\ncharacteristic of the animal in general, but only of certain\nindividuals; while other variations in the shape and length of certain\nbones are of too little consequence to be accepted as bases whereon to\nfound a new genus or even species, and we may therefore assume that\nthe Urus of C\u00e6sar, the Re\u00eam of Scripture, was nothing more than a very\nlarge variety of the ox, modified of course in aspect and habits by\nthe locality in which it lived. This assumption is strengthened by the\nfact that Mr. Dawkins, in the treatise to which reference has already\nbeen made, has \"traced the gigantic Urus from the earliest Pleistocene\ntimes through the pre-historic period at least as far as the twelfth\ncentury after Christ.\"\n\nThe reader may remember that in C\u00e6sar's brief but graphic account of\nthe Urus, he mentions that it was hunted by those who wished to\ndistinguish themselves. Now, on many of the sculptures of Nineveh,\nthere are delineations of bull hunts, which show, as Mr. Layard justly\nobserves, that the wild bull appears to have been considered scarcely\nless formidable and noble game than the lion. The king himself is\nshown as attacking it, while the warriors partake of the sport either\nmounted or on foot.\n\nThe exact variety of the wild bull which is being chased is not very\nrecognisable. It certainly is not the ordinary domestic animal, the\nshape approaching somewhat to that of the antelope. The body is\ncovered with marks which are evidently intended to represent hair,\nthough it does not follow that the hair need be thick and shaggy like\nthat of the bison tribe.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BISON.\n\n The Bison tribe and its distinguishing marks--Its former\n existence in Palestine--Its general habits--Origin of its\n name--Its musky odour--Size and speed of the Bison--Its\n dangerous character when brought to bay--Its defence against the\n wolf--Its untameable disposition.\n\n\nA few words are now needful respecting the second animal which has\nbeen mentioned in connexion with the Re\u00eam; namely, the Bison, or\nBonassus. The Bisons are distinguishable from ordinary cattle by the\nthick and heavy mane which covers the neck and shoulders, and which is\nmore conspicuous in the male than in the female. The general coating\nof the body is also rather different, being thick and woolly instead\nof lying closely to the skin like that of the other oxen. The Bison\ncertainly inhabited Palestine, as its bones have been found in that\ncountry. It has, however, been extinct in the Holy Land for many\nyears, and, not being an animal that is capable of withstanding the\nencroachments of man, it has gradually died out from the greater part\nof Europe and Asia, and is now to be found only in a very limited\nlocality, chiefly in a Lithuanian forest, where it is strictly\npreserved, and in some parts of the Caucasus. There it still preserves\nthe habits which made its ancient and gigantic relative so dangerous\nan animal. Unlike the buffalo, which loves the low-lying and marshy\nlands, the Bison prefers the high wooded localities, where it lives in\nsmall troops.\n\nIts name of Bison is a modification of the word Bisam, or musk, which\nwas given to it on account of the strong musky odour of its flesh,\nwhich is especially powerful about the head and neck. This odour is\nnot so unpleasant as might be supposed, and those who have had\npersonal experience of the animal say that it bears some resemblance\nto the perfume of violets. It is developed most strongly in the adult\nbulls, the cows and young male calves only possessing it in a slight\ndegree.\n\n [Illustration: BISON KILLING WOLF.\n\n \"_Will the unicorn he willing to serve thee?_\"--JOB xxxix. 9.]\n\nIt is a tolerably large animal, being about six feet high at the\nshoulder--a stature nearly equivalent to that of the ordinary Asiatic\nelephant; and, in spite of its great bulk, is a fleet and active\nanimal, as indeed is generally the case with those oxen which inhabit\nelevated localities. Still, though it can run with considerable speed,\nit is not able to keep up the pace for any great distance, and at the\nend of a mile or two can be brought to bay.\n\nLike most animals, however large and powerful they may be, it fears\nthe presence of man, and, if it sees or scents a human being, will try\nto slip quietly away; but when it is baffled in this attempt, and\nforced to fight, it becomes a fierce and dangerous antagonist,\ncharging with wonderful quickness, and using its short and powerful\nhorns with great effect. A wounded Bison, when fairly brought to bay,\nis perhaps as awkward an opponent as can be found, and to kill it\nwithout the aid of firearms is no easy matter.\n\nAlthough the countries in which it lives are infested with wolves, it\nseems to have no fear of them when in health; and, even when pressed\nby their winter's hunger, the wolves do not venture to attack even a\nsingle Bison, much less a herd of them. Like other wild cattle, it\nlikes to dabble in muddy pools, and is fond of harbouring in thickets\nnear such localities; and those who have to travel through the forest\nkeep clear of such spots, unless they desire to drive out the animal\nfor the purpose of killing it.\n\nLike the extinct Aurochs, the Bison has never been domesticated, and,\nalthough the calves have been captured while very young, and attempts\nhave been made to train them to harness, their innate wildness of\ndisposition has always baffled such efforts.\n\n\n\n\nTHE GAZELLE, OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The Gazelle identified with the _Tsebi_, i.e. the Roe or Roebuck\n of Scripture--Various passages relating to the Tsebi--Its\n swiftness, its capabilities as a beast of chase, its beauty, and\n the quality of its flesh--The Tsebiyah rendered in Greek as\n Tabitha, and translated as Dorcas, or Gazelle--Different\n varieties of the Gazelle--How the Gazelle defends itself against\n wild beasts--Chase of the Gazelle--The net, the battue, and the\n pitfall--Coursing the Gazelle with greyhounds and falcons--Mr.\n Chasseaud's account of a hunting party--Gentleness of the\n Gazelle.\n\n\nWe now leave the Ox tribe, and come to the Antelopes, several species\nof which are mentioned in the Scriptures. Four kinds of antelope are\nfound in or near the Holy Land, and there is little doubt that all of\nthem are mentioned in the sacred volume.\n\nThe first that will be described is the well-known GAZELLE, which is\nacknowledged to be the animal that is represented by the word _Tsebi_,\nor _Tsebiyah_. The Jewish Bible accepts the same rendering. This word\noccurs many times, sometimes as a metaphor, and sometimes representing\nsome animal which was lawful food, and which therefore belonged to the\ntrue ruminants. Moreover, its flesh was not only legally capable of\nbeing eaten, but was held in such estimation that it was provided for\nthe table of Solomon himself, together with other animals which will\nbe described in their turn.\n\nWe will first take the passages where the word is used metaphorically,\nor as a poetical image. That it was exceedingly swift of foot is\nevident from several instances in which the animal is mentioned. For\nexample, in 2 Sam. ii. 18, we are told that Asahel, the brother of\nJoab, was \"as light of foot as a wild roe,\" or, as the passage may\nalso be translated, \"one of the roes that is in the field.\" And in 1\nChron. xii. 8, we find the following description of eleven warriors\nwho attached themselves to David:--\"Of the Gadites there separated\nthemselves unto David into the hold to the wilderness men of might,\nand men of war fit for the battle, that could handle shield and\nbuckler, whose faces were like the faces of lions, and were as swift\nas the roes upon the mountains.\"\n\nThat it was a beast of chase is as plainly to be gathered from the\nsacred writings. See, for example, Prov. vi. 4, 5: \"Give not sleep to\nthine eyes, nor slumber to thine eyelids. Deliver thyself as a roe\nfrom the hand of the hunter, and as a bird from the hand of the\nfowler.\"\n\nThe same imagery is employed by the prophet Isaiah, xiii. 13, 14:--\n\n\"Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of\nher place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of His\nfierce anger. And it shall be as the chased roe, and as a sheep that\nno man taketh up: they shall every man turn to his own people, and\nflee every one into his own land.\"\n\nHaving now learned that the Tsebi was very fleet of foot and a beast\nof chase, we come to another series of passages, which show that it\nwas an animal of acknowledged beauty. In that most remarkable poem,\nthe Song of Solomon, or the \"Song of Songs,\" as it is more rightly\nnamed, there are repeated allusions to the Tsebi. In some cases the\nname of the Roe is used as a sort of adjuration--\"I charge thee by the\nroes;\" and in others the lover, whether man or woman, is compared to\nthe Roe. There is one consecutive series of passages in which the word\nis repeatedly used. See Cant. ii. 7-9: \"I charge you, O ye daughters\nof Jerusalem, by the roes, and by the hinds of the field, that ye stir\nnot up, nor awake my love, till he please. The voice of my beloved!\nbehold, he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills.\nMy beloved is like a roe or a young hart.\" And in the last verse of\nthe poem the same image is repeated--\"Make haste, my beloved, and be\nthou like to a roe or to a young hart upon the mountains of spices.\"\n\nAllusion is made to the beauty of the Roe, or Gazelle, in a well-known\nname, Tabitha, which is, in fact, a slight corruption of the Hebrew\nTsebiyah, and is translated into Greek as Dorcas, or Gazelle. \"Now\nthere was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by\ninterpretation is called Dorcas (_i.e._ the Gazelle). This woman was\nfull of good works and alms deeds which she did.\"\n\nAs to the flesh of the Gazelle, or Roe, it is mentioned in Deut. xii.\n15, xiv. 5, as one of the animals that affords lawful food; and the\nsame permission is reiterated in xv. 22, with the proviso that the\nblood shall be poured out on the earth like water.\n\nHaving now glanced at the various passages of Scripture wherein the\nGazelle is mentioned, we will proceed to the animal itself, its\nappearance, locality, and general habits, in order to see how they\nagree with the Scriptural allusions to the Tsebi.\n\nAs to its flesh, it is even now considered a great dainty, although it\nis not at all agreeable to European taste, being hard, dry, and\nwithout flavour. Still, as has been well remarked, tastes differ as\nwell as localities, and an article of food which is a costly luxury in\none land is utterly disdained in another, and will hardly be eaten\nexcept by one who is absolutely dying of starvation.\n\nThe Gazelle is very common in Palestine in the present day, and, in\nthe ancient times, must have been even more plentiful. There are\nseveral varieties of it, which were once thought to be distinct\nspecies, but are now acknowledged to be mere varieties, all of which\nare referable to the single species _Gazella Dorcas_. There is, for\nexample, the Corinna, or Corine Antelope, which is a rather\nboldly-spotted female; the Kevella Antelope, in which the horns are\nslightly flattened; the small variety called the Ariel, or Cora; the\ngrey Kevel, which is a rather large variety; and the Long-horned\nGazelle, which owes its name to a rather large development of the\nhorns.\n\n [Illustration: THE GAZELLE, (_Gazella Dorcus_) OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE\n\n \"_Behold, he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the\n hills. My beloved is like a roe or a young hart._\"--CANT. ii. 8, 9.]\n\nWhatever variety may inhabit any given spot, they all have the same\nhabits. They are gregarious animals, associating together in herds\noften of considerable size, and deriving from their numbers an element\nof strength which would otherwise be wanting. Against mankind, numbers\nare of no avail; but when the agile though feeble Gazelle has to\ndefend itself against the predatory animals of its own land, it can\nonly defend itself by the concerted action of the whole herd. Should,\nfor example, the wolves prowl round a herd of Gazelles, after their\ntreacherous wont, the Gazelles instantly assume a posture of\nself-defence. They form themselves into a compact phalanx, all the\nmales coming to the front, and the strongest and boldest taking on\nthemselves the honourable duty of facing the foe. The does and the\nyoung are kept within their ranks, and so formidable is the array of\nsharp, menacing horns, that beasts as voracious as the wolf, and far\nmore powerful, have been known to retire without attempting to charge.\n\nAs a rule, however, the Gazelle does not desire to resist, and prefers\nits legs to its horns as a mode of insuring safety. So fleet is the\nanimal, that it seems to fly over the ground as if propelled by\nvolition alone, and its light, agile frame is so enduring, that a fair\nchase has hardly any prospect of success. Hunters, therefore, prefer a\ntrap of some kind, if they chase the animal merely for food or for the\nsake of its skin, and contrive to kill considerable numbers at once.\nSometimes they dig pitfalls, and drive the Gazelles into them by\nbeating a large tract of country, and gradually narrowing the circle.\nSometimes they use nets, such as have already been described, and\nsometimes they line the sides of a ravine with archers and spearmen,\nand drive the herd of Gazelles through the treacherous defile.\n\nThese modes of slaughter are, however, condemned by the true hunter,\nwho looks upon those who use them much in the same light as an English\nsportsman looks on a man who shoots foxes. The greyhound and the\nfalcon are both employed in the legitimate capture of the Gazelle, and\nin some cases both are trained to work together. Hunting the Gazelle\nwith the greyhound very much resembles coursing in our own country,\nand chasing it with the hawk is exactly like the system of falconry\nthat was once so popular an English sport, and which even now shows\nsigns of revival.\n\nIt is, however, when the dog and the bird are trained to work together\nthat the spectacle becomes really novel and interesting to an English\nspectator.\n\nAs soon as the Gazelles are fairly in view, the hunter unhoods his\nhawk, and holds it up so that it may see the animals. The bird fixes\nits eye on one Gazelle, and by that glance the animal's doom is\nsettled. The falcon darts after the Gazelles, followed by the dog, who\nkeeps his eye on the hawk, and holds himself in readiness to attack\nthe animal that his feathered ally may select. Suddenly the falcon,\nwhich has been for some few seconds hovering over the herd of\nGazelles, makes a stoop upon the selected victim, fastening its talons\nin its forehead, and, as it tries to shake off its strange foe, flaps\nits wings into the Gazelle's eyes so as to blind it. Consequently, the\nrapid course of the antelope is arrested, so that the dog is able to\ncome up and secure the animal while it is struggling to escape from\nits feathered enemy. Sometimes, though rarely, a young and\ninexperienced hawk swoops down with such reckless force that it misses\nthe forehead of the Gazelle, and impales itself upon the sharp horns,\njust as in England the falcon is apt to be spitted on the bill of the\nheron.\n\nThe most sportsmanlike mode of hunting the Gazelle is to use the\nfalcon alone; but for this sport a bird must possess exceptional\nstrength, swiftness, and intelligence. A very spirited account of such\na chase is given by Mr. G. W. Chasseaud, in his \"Druses of the\nLebanon:\"--\n\n\"Whilst reposing here, our old friend with the falcon informs us that\nat a short distance from this spot is a khan called Nebbi Youni, from\na supposition that the prophet Jonah was here landed by the whale; but\nthe old man is very indignant when we identify the place with a fable,\nand declare to him that similar sights are to be seen at Gaza and\nScanderoon. But his good humour is speedily recovered by reverting to\nthe subject of the exploits and cleverness of his falcon. This reminds\nhim that we have not much time to waste in idle talk, as the greater\nheats will drive the gazelles from the plains to the mountain\nretreats, and lose us the opportunity of enjoying the most\nsportsmanlike amusement in Syria. Accordingly, bestriding our animals\nagain, we ford the river at that point where a bridge once stood.\n\n\"We have barely proceeded twenty minutes before the keen eye of the\nfalconer has descried a herd of gazelles quietly grazing in the\ndistance. Immediately he reins in his horse, and enjoining silence,\ninstead of riding at them, as we might have felt inclined to do, he\nskirts along the banks of the river, so as to cut off, if possible,\nthe retreat of these fleet animals where the banks are narrowest,\nthough very deep, but which would be cleared at a single leap by the\ngazelles. Having successfully accomplished this manoeuvre, he again\nremoves the hood from the hawk, and indicates to us that precaution\nis no longer necessary. Accordingly, first adding a few slugs to the\ncharges in our barrels, we balance our guns in an easy posture, and,\ngiving the horses their reins, set off at full gallop, and with a loud\nhurrah, right towards the already startled gazelles.\n\n\"The timid animals, at first paralysed by our appearance, stand and\ngaze for a second terror-stricken at our approach; but their pause is\nonly momentary; they perceive in an instant that the retreat to their\nfavourite haunts has been secured, and so they dash wildly forward\nwith all the fleetness of despair, coursing over the plain with no\nfixed refuge in view, and nothing but their fleetness to aid in their\ndelivery. A stern chase is a long chase, and so, doubtless, on the\npresent occasion it would prove with ourselves, for there is many and\nmany a mile of level country before us, and our horses, though swift\nof foot, stand no chance in this respect with the gazelles.\n\n\"Now, however, the old man has watched for a good opportunity to\ndisplay the prowess and skill of his falcon: he has followed us only\nat a hand-gallop; but the hawk, long inured to such pastime, stretches\nforth its neck eagerly in the direction of the flying prey, and being\nloosened from its pinions, sweeps up into the air like a shot, and\npasses overhead with incredible velocity. Five minutes more, and the\nbird has outstripped even the speed of the light-footed gazelle; we\nsee him through the dust and haze that our own speed throws around us,\nhovering but an instant over the terrified herd; he has singled out\nhis prey, and, diving with unerring aim, fixes his iron talons into\nthe head of the terrified animal.\n\n\"This is the signal for the others to break up their orderly retreat,\nand to speed over the plain in every direction. Some, despite the\ndanger that hovers on their track, make straight for their old and\nfamiliar haunts, and passing within twenty yards of where we ride,\nafford us an opportunity of displaying our skill as amateur huntsmen\non horseback; nor does it require but little nerve and dexterity to\nfix our aim whilst our horses are tearing over the ground. However,\nthe moment presents itself, the loud report of barrel after barrel\nstartles the unaccustomed inmates of that unfrequented waste; one\ngazelle leaps twice its own height into the air, and then rolls over,\nshot through the heart; another bounds on yet a dozen paces, but,\nwounded mortally, staggering, halts, and then falls to the ground.\n\n\"This is no time for us to pull in and see what is the amount of\ndamage done, for the falcon, heedless of all surrounding incidents,\nclings firmly to the head of its terrified victim, flapping its strong\nwings awhile before the poor brute's terrified eyes, half blinding it\nand rendering its head dizzy; till, after tearing round and round with\nincredible speed, the poor creature stops, panting for breath, and,\novercome with excessive terror, drops down fainting upon the earth.\nNow the air resounds with the acclamations and hootings of the\nruthless victors.\n\n\"The old man is wild in his transports of delight. More certain of the\nprowess of his bird than ourselves, he has stopped awhile to gather\ntogether the fruits of our booty, and, with these suspended to his\nsaddle bow, he canters up leisurely, shouting lustily the while the\npraises of his infallible hawk; then getting down, and hoodwinking the\nbird again, he first of all takes the precaution of fastening together\nthe legs of the fallen gazelle, and then he humanely blows up into its\nnostrils. Gradually the natural brilliancy returns to the dimmed eyes\nof the gazelle, then it struggles valiantly, but vainly, to\ndisentangle itself from its fetters.\n\n\"Pitying its efforts, the falconer throws a handkerchief over its\nhead, and, securing this prize, claims it as his own, declaring that\nhe will bear it home to his house in the mountains, where, after a few\nweeks' kind treatment and care, it will become as domesticated and\naffectionate as a spaniel. Meanwhile, Abou Shein gathers together the\nfallen booty, and, tying them securely with cords, fastens them behind\nhis own saddle, declaring, with a triumphant laugh, that we shall\nreturn that evening to the city of Beyrout with such game as few\nsportsmen can boast of having carried thither in one day.\"\n\nThe gentle nature of the Gazelle is as proverbial as its grace and\nswiftness, and is well expressed in the large, soft, liquid eye, which\nhas formed from time immemorial the stock comparison of Oriental poets\nwhen describing the eyes of beauty.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PYGARG, OR ADDAX.\n\n The Dishon or Dyshon--Signification of the word\n Pygarg--Certainty that the Dishon is an antelope, and that it\n must be one of a few species--Former and present range of the\n Addax--Description of the Addax--The Strepsiceros of Pliny.\n\n\nThere is a species of animal mentioned once in the Scriptures under\nthe name of Dishon which the Jewish Bible leaves untranslated, and\nmerely gives as Dyshon, and which is rendered in the Septuagint by\nPugargos, or PYGARG, as one version gives it. Now, the meaning of the\nword Pygarg is white-crouped, and for that reason the Pygarg of the\nScriptures is usually held to be one of the white-crouped antelopes,\nof which several species are known. Perhaps it may be one of them--it\nmay possibly be neither, and it may probably refer to all of them.\n\nBut that an antelope of some kind is meant by the word Dishon is\nevident enough, and it is also evident that the Dishon must have been\none of the antelopes which could be obtained by the Jews. Now as the\nspecies of antelope which could have furnished food for that nation\nare very few in number, it is clear that, even if we do not hit upon\nthe exact species, we may be sure of selecting an animal that was\nclosely allied to it. Moreover, as the nomenclature is exceedingly\nloose, it is probable that more than one species might have been\nincluded in the word Dishon.\n\nModern commentators have agreed that there is every probability that\nthe Dishon of the Pentateuch was the antelope known by the name of\nAddax.\n\nThis handsome antelope is a native of Northern Africa. It has a very\nwide range, and, even at the present day, is found in the vicinity of\nPalestine, so that it evidently was one of the antelopes which could\nbe killed by Jewish hunters. From its large size, and long twisted\nhorns, it bears a strong resemblance to the Koodoo of Southern Africa.\nThe horns, however, are not so long, nor so boldly twisted, the curve\nbeing comparatively slight, and not possessing the bold spiral shape\nwhich distinguishes those of the koodoo.\n\n [Illustration: THE ADDAX, OR PYGARG OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, ... the\n pygarg, and the wild ox, and the chamois._\"--DEUT. xiv. 4, 5.]\n\nThe ordinary height of the Addax is three feet seven or eight inches,\nand the horns are almost exactly alike in the two sexes. Their length,\nfrom the head to the tips, is rather more than two feet. Its colour is\nmostly white, but a thick mane of dark black hair falls from the\nthroat, a patch of similar hair grows on the forehead, and the back\nand shoulders are greyish brown. There is no mane on the back of the\nneck, as is the case with the koodoo.\n\nThe Addax is a sand-loving animal, as is shown by the wide and\nspreading hoofs, which afford it a firm footing on the yielding soil.\nIn all probability, this is one of the animals which would be taken,\nlike the wild bull, in a net, being surrounded and driven into the\ntoils by a number of hunters. It is not, however, one of the\ngregarious species, and is not found in those vast herds in which some\nof the antelopes love to assemble.\n\nSome writers reject the Addax as the Dishon, and are inclined to\nconsider that the real representative of the word is to be found in\nthe Ariel or Isabella gazelles. Of these, however, we have already\ntreated, and enough has been said about them to show that these\ngazelles are in all probability comprised under the name Tsebi.\n\nIt has been suggested, in contradiction to the opinion that the Dishon\nis the Addax, that the word Strepsiceros, or Twisted Horn, is given to\nit by Pliny, who also mentions that one of the native names for the\nanimal is Adas, or Akas, and that he distinguishes it from the Pygarg.\nStill, the weight of evidence is so great in favour of the identity of\nthe Dishon and the Pygarg, that we may accept the interpretation with\nsafety.\n\n\n\n\nTHE FALLOW-DEER, OR BUBALE.\n\n The word Jachmur evidently represents a species of\n antelope--Probability that the Jachmur is identical with the\n Bubale, or Bekk'r-el-Wash--Resemblance of the animal to the ox\n tribe--Its ox-like horns and mode of attack--Its capability of\n domestication--Former and present range of the Bubale--Its\n representation on the monuments of ancient Egypt--Delicacy of\n its flesh--Size and general appearance of the animal.\n\n\nIt has already been mentioned that in the Old Testament there occur\nthe names of three or four animals, which clearly belong to one or\nother of three or four antelopes. Only one of these names now remains\nto be identified. This is the Jachmur, or Yachmur, a word which has\nbeen rendered in the Septuagint as Boubalos, and has been translated\nin our Authorized Version as FALLOW DEER.\n\nWe shall presently see that the Fallow Deer is to be identified with\nanother animal, and that the word Jachmur must find another\ninterpretation. If we follow the Septuagint, and call it the BUBALE,\nwe shall identify it with a well-known antelope, called by the Arabs\nthe \"Bekk'r-el-Wash,\" and known to zoologists as the BUBALE\n(_Acronotus bubalis_).\n\nThis fine antelope would scarcely be recognised as such by an\nunskilled observer, as in its general appearance it much more\nresembles the ox tribe than the antelope. Indeed, the Arabic title,\n\"Bekk'r-el-Wash,\" or Wild Cow, shows how close must be the resemblance\nto the oxen. The Arabs, and indeed all the Orientals in whose\ncountries it lives, believe it not to be an antelope, but one of the\noxen, and class it accordingly.\n\nHow much the appearance of the Bubale justifies them in this opinion\nmay be judged by reference to the figure on page 145. The horns are\nthick, short, and heavy, and are first inclined forwards, and then\nrather suddenly bent backwards. This formation of the horns causes the\nBubale to use his weapons after the manner of the bull, thereby\nincreasing the resemblance between them. When it attacks, the Bubale\nlowers its head to the ground, and as soon as its antagonist is within\nreach, tosses its head violently upwards, or swings it with a sidelong\nupward blow. In either case, the sharp curved horns, impelled by the\npowerful neck of the animal, and assisted by the weight of the large\nhead, become most formidable weapons.\n\nIt is said that in some places, where the Bubales have learned to\nendure the presence of man, they will mix with his herds for the sake\nof feeding with them, and by degrees become so accustomed to the\ncompanionship of their domesticated friends, that they live with the\nherd as if they had belonged to it all their lives. This fact shows\nthat the animal possesses a gentle disposition, and it is said to be\nas easily tamed as the gazelle itself.\n\nEven at the present day the Bubale has a very wide range, and formerly\nhad in all probability a much wider. It is indigenous to Barbary, and\nhas continued to spread itself over the greater part of Northern\nAfrica, including the borders of the Sahara, the edges of the\ncultivated districts, and up the Nile for no small distance. In former\ndays it was evidently a tolerably common animal of chase in Upper\nEgypt, as there are representations of it on the monuments, drawn\nwith the quaint truthfulness which distinguishes the monumental\nsculpture of that period.\n\n [Illustration: THE BUBALE, OR FALLOW DEER OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_And Solomon's provision for one day was thirty measures of fine\n flour, and threescore measure of meal; ten fat oxen, and twenty oxen\n out of the pastures, and an hundred sheep; beside harts and roebucks,\n and fallow-deer, and fatted fowl._\"--1 KINGS iv. 22, 23.]\n\nIt is probable that in and about Palestine it was equally common, so\nthat there is good reason why it should be specially named as one of\nthe animals that were lawful food. Not only was its flesh permitted to\nbe eaten, but it was evidently considered as a great dainty, inasmuch\nas the Jachmur is mentioned in 1 Kings iv. 23 as one of the animals\nwhich were brought to the royal table. See the passage quoted in full\nbelow the illustration.\n\nEven at the present day it is seen near the Red Sea; and as within the\nmemory of man it had a much larger range than can now be assigned to\nit, we may safely conjecture that it resided in Palestine in\nsufficient numbers to afford a constant supply of food to the royal\nresidence.\n\nIn size the Bubale is about equal to that of a heifer, and its general\ncolour is reddish brown. The head is long and narrow, so that the\nheavy and deeply-ridged horns seem to stand out with peculiar\nboldness. The shoulders are rather high, the neck is very ox-like, and\nfrom the end of the tail hangs a tuft of long black hair. It is a\ngregarious animal, and is found in herds, though not of very great\nnumbers.\n\nThe Bubale is closely allied to the hartebeest, the well-known\nantelope of Southern Africa.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SHEEP.\n\n\n Importance of Sheep in the Bible--The Sheep the chief wealth of\n the pastoral tribes--Tenure of land--Value of good\n pasture-land--Arab shepherds of the present day--Difference\n between the shepherds of Palestine and England--Wanderings of\n the flocks in search of food--Value of the wells--How the Sheep\n are watered--Duties of the shepherd--The shepherd a kind of\n irregular soldier--His use of the sling--Sheep following their\n shepherd--Calling the Sheep by name--The shepherd usually a part\n owner of the flocks--Structure of the sheepfolds--The rock\n caverns of Palestine--David's adventure with Saul--Penning of\n the Sheep by night--Use of the dogs--Sheep sometimes brought up\n by hand--How Sheep are fattened in the Lebanon district--The two\n breeds of Sheep in Palestine--The broad-tailed Sheep, and its\n peculiarities--Reference to this peculiarity in the Bible--The\n Talmudical writers, and their directions to sheep-owners.\n\n\nWe now come to a subject which will necessarily occupy us for some\nlittle time.\n\nThere is, perhaps, no animal which occupies a larger space in the\nScriptures than the SHEEP. Whether in religious, civil, or domestic\nlife, we find that the Sheep is bound up with the Jewish nation in a\nway that would seem almost incomprehensible, did we not recall the\nlight which the New Testament throws upon the Old, and the many\nallusions to the coming Messiah under the figure of the Lamb that\ntaketh away the sins of the world.\n\nIn treating of the Sheep, it will be perhaps advisable to begin the\naccount by taking the animal simply as one of those creatures which\nhave been domesticated from time immemorial, dwelling slightly on\nthose points on which the sheep-owners of the old days differed from\nthose of our own time.\n\nIn the first place, the tenure of land was--and is still--entirely\ndifferent from anything that can be found in our own country. With us,\nthe comparatively large amount of population, placed on a\ncomparatively small area of ground, prohibits the mode of\nsheep-keeping as practised in the East, where the pasture-lands are of\nvast extent, and common to all who choose to take their flocks to\nthem. We have at present the Downs and the Highlands as examples of\nsuch pasturage, but they are of small extent when compared with the\nvast plains which are used for this purpose in the East.\n\nThe only claim to the land seems, in the old times of the Scriptures,\nto have lain in cultivation, or perhaps in the land immediately\nsurrounding a well. But any one appears to have taken a piece of\nground and cultivated it, or to have dug a well wherever he chose, and\nthereby to have acquired a sort of right to the soil. The same custom\nprevails at the present day among the cattle-breeding races of\nSouthern Africa. The banks of rivers, on account of their superior\nfertility, were considered as the property of the chiefs who lived\nalong their course, but the inland soil was free to all.\n\nHad it not been for this freedom of the land, it would have been\nimpossible for the great men to have nourished the enormous flocks and\nherds of which their wealth consisted; but, on account of the lack of\nownership of the soil, a flock could be moved to one district after\nanother as fast as it exhausted the herbage, the shepherds thus\nunconsciously imitating the habits of the gregarious animals, which\nare always on the move from one spot to another.\n\nPasturage being thus free to all, Sheep had a higher comparative value\nthan is the case with ourselves, who have to pay in some way for their\nkeep. There is a proverb in the Talmud which may be curtly translated,\n\"Land sell, sheep buy.\"\n\nThe value of a good pasture-ground for the flocks is so great, that\nits possession is well worth a battle, the shepherds being saved from\na most weary and harassing life, and being moreover fewer in number\nthan is needed when the pasturage is scanty. Sir S. Baker, in his work\non Abyssinia, makes some very interesting remarks upon the Arab\nherdsmen, who are placed in conditions very similar to those of the\nIsraelitish shepherds in a bad pasture-land.\n\n\"The Arabs are creatures of necessity; their nomadic life is\ncompulsory, as the existence of their flocks and herds depends upon\nthe pasturage. Thus, with the change of seasons they must change their\nlocalities according to the presence of fodder for their cattle....\nThe Arab cannot halt in one spot longer than the pasturage will\nsupport his flocks. The object of his life being fodder, he must\nwander in search of the ever-changing supply. His wants must be few,\nas the constant change of encampment necessitates the transport of all\nhis household goods; thus he reduces to a minimum his domestic\nfurniture and utensils....\n\n\"This striking similarity to the descriptions of the Old Testament is\nexceedingly interesting to a traveller when residing among these\ncurious and original people. With the Bible in one's hand, and these\nunchanged tribes before the eyes, there is a thrilling illustration of\nthe sacred record; the past becomes the present, the veil of three\nthousand years is raised, and the living picture is a witness to the\nexactness of the historical description. At the same time there is a\nlight thrown upon many obscure passages in the Old Testament by the\nexperience of the present customs and figures of speech of the Arabs,\nwhich are precisely those that were practised at the periods\ndescribed....\n\n\"Should the present history of the country be written by an Arab\nscribe, the style of the description would be precisely that of the\nOld Testament. There is a fascination in the unchangeable features of\nthe Nile regions. There are the vast pyramids that have defied time,\nthe river upon which Moses was cradled in infancy, the same sandy\ndesert through which he led his people, and the watering-places where\ntheir flocks were led to drink. The wild and wandering Arabs, who\nthousands of years ago dug out the wells in the wilderness, are\nrepresented by their descendants, unchanged, who now draw water from\nthe deep wells of their forefathers, with the skins that have never\naltered their fashion.\n\n\"The Arabs, gathering with their goats and sheep around the wells\nto-day, recall the recollection of that distant time when 'Jacob went\non his journey, and came into the land of the people of the east. And\nhe looked, and behold a well in the field, and lo! there were three\nflocks of sheep lying by it,' &c. The picture of that scene would be\nan illustration of Arab daily life in the Nubian deserts, where the\npresent is a mirror of the past.\"\n\nOwing to the great number of Sheep which they have to tend, and the\npeculiar state of the country, the life of the shepherd in Palestine\nis even now very different from that of an English shepherd, and in\nthe days of the early Scriptures the distinction was even more\ndistinctly marked.\n\nSheep had to be tended much more carefully than we generally think. In\nthe first place, a thoughtful shepherd had always one idea before his\nmind,--namely, the possibility of obtaining sufficient water for his\nflocks. Even pasturage is less important than water, and, however\ntempting a district might be, no shepherd would venture to take his\ncharge there if he were not sure of obtaining water. In a climate such\nas ours, this ever-pressing anxiety respecting water can scarcely be\nappreciated, for in hot climates not only is water scarce, but it is\nneeded far more than in a temperate and moist climate. Thirst does its\nwork with terrible quickness, and there are instances recorded where\nmen have sat down and died of thirst in sight of the river which they\nhad not strength to reach.\n\nIn places therefore through which no stream runs, the wells are the\ngreat centres of pasturage, around which are to be seen vast flocks\nextending far in every direction. These wells are kept carefully\nclosed by their owners, and are only opened for the use of those who\nare entitled to water their flocks at them.\n\nNoontide is the general time for watering the Sheep, and towards that\nhour all the flocks may be seen converging towards their respective\nwells, the shepherd at the head of each flock, and the Sheep following\nhim. See how forcible becomes the imagery of David, the shepherd poet,\n\"The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down\nin green pastures (or, in pastures of tender grass): He leadeth me\nbeside the still waters\" Ps. xxiii. 1, 2). Here we have two of the\nprincipal duties of the good shepherd brought prominently before\nus,--namely, the guiding of the Sheep to green pastures and leading\nthem to fresh water. Very many references are made in the Scriptures\nto the pasturage of sheep, both in a technical and a metaphorical\nsense; but as our space is limited, and these passages are very\nnumerous, only one or two of each will be taken.\n\nIn the story of Joseph, we find that when his father and brothers were\nsuffering from the famine, they seem to have cared as much for their\nSheep and cattle as for themselves, inasmuch as among a pastoral\npeople the flocks and herds constitute the only wealth. So, when\nJoseph at last discovered himself, and his family were admitted to the\nfavour of Pharaoh, the first request which they made was for their\nflocks. \"Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And\nthey said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also\nour fathers.\n\n\"They said moreover unto Pharaoh, For to sojourn in the land are we\ncome; for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks; for the\nfamine is sore in the land of Canaan: now therefore, we pray thee, let\nthy servants dwell in the land of Goshen.\"\n\nThis one incident, so slightly remarked in the sacred history, gives a\nwonderfully clear notion of the sort of life led by Jacob and his\nsons. Forming, according to custom, a small tribe of their own, of\nwhich the father was the chief, they led a pastoral life, taking their\ncontinually increasing herds and flocks from place to place as they\ncould find food for them. For example, at the memorable time when the\nstory of Joseph begins, he was sent by his father to his brothers, who\nwere feeding the flocks, and he wandered about for some time, not\nknowing where to find them. It may seem strange that he should be\nunable to discover such very conspicuous objects as large flocks of\nsheep and goats, but the fact is that they had been driven from one\npasture-land to another, and had travelled in search of food all the\nway from Shechem to Dothan.\n\nIn 1 Chron. iv. 39, 40, we read of the still pastoral Israelites that\n\"they went to the entrance of Gedor, even unto the east side of the\nvalley, to seek pasture for their flocks. And they found fat pasture\nand good, and the land was wide, and quiet, and peaceable.\"\n\nHow it came to be quiet and peaceable is told in the context. It was\npeaceable simply because the Israelites were attracted by the good\npasturage, attacked the original inhabitants, and exterminated them so\neffectually that none were left to offer resistance to the usurpers.\nAnd we find from this passage that the value of good pasture-land\nwhere the Sheep could feed continually without being forced to wander\nfrom one spot to another was so considerable, that the owners of the\nflocks engaged in war, and exposed their own lives, in order to obtain\nso valuable a possession.\n\nAs to the figurative passages, they are far too numerous to be quoted,\nand are found throughout the whole of the Old and New Testaments. For\nexample, see Psalm lxxix. 13, \"So we Thy people and the sheep of Thy\npasture will give Thee thanks for ever.\" And again, \"I will feed them\nupon the mountains of Israel by the rivers, and in all the inhabited\nplaces of the country. I will feed them in a good pasture, and upon\nthe high mountains of Israel shall their fold be: there shall they lie\nin a good fold, and in a fat pasture shall they feed upon the\nmountains of Israel\" (Ezek. xxxiv. 13, 14).\n\nWe will now look at one or two of the passages that mention watering\nthe Sheep--a duty so imperative on an Oriental shepherd, and so\nneedless to our own.\n\nIn the first place we find that most graphic narrative which occurs in\nGen xxix. to which a passing reference has already been made. When\nJacob was on his way from his parents to the home of Laban in\nPadan-aram, he came upon the very well which belonged to his uncle,\nand there saw three flocks of Sheep lying around the well, waiting\nuntil the proper hour arrived. According to custom, a large stone was\nlaid over the well, so as to perform the double office of keeping out\nthe sand and dust, and of guarding the precious water against those\nwho had no right to it. And when he saw his cousin Rachel arrive with\nthe flock of which she had the management, he, according to the\ncourtesy of the country and the time, rolled away the ponderous\nbarrier, and poured out water into the troughs for the Sheep which\nRachel tended.\n\nAbout two hundred years afterwards, we find Moses performing a similar\nact. When he was obliged to escape into Midian on account of his fatal\nquarrel with a tyrannical Egyptian, he sat down by a well, waiting for\nthe time when the stone might be rolled away, and the water be\ndistributed. Now it happened that this well belonged to Jethro, the\nchief priest of the country, whose wealth consisted principally of\nSheep. He entrusted his flock to the care of his seven daughters, who\nled their Sheep to the well and drew water as usual into the troughs.\nPresuming on their weakness, other shepherds came and tried to drive\nthem away, but were opposed by Moses, who drove them away, and with\nhis own hands watered the flock.\n\nNow in both these examples we find that the men who performed the\ncourteous office of drawing the water and pouring it into the\nsheep-troughs married afterwards the girl to whose charge the flocks\nhad been committed. This brings us to the Oriental custom which has\nbeen preserved to the present day.\n\nThe wells at which the cattle are watered at noon-day are the\nmeeting-places of the tribe, and it is chiefly at the well that the\nyoung men and women meet each other. As each successive flock arrives\nat the well, the number of the people increases, and while the sheep\nand goats lie patiently round the water, waiting for the time when the\nlast flock shall arrive, and the stone be rolled off the mouth of the\nwell, the gossip of the tribe is discussed, and the young people have\nample opportunity for the pleasing business of courtship.\n\nAs to the passages in which the wells, rivers, brooks, water-springs,\nare spoken of in a metaphorical sense, they are too numerous to be\nquoted.\n\nAnd here I may observe, that in reality the whole of Scripture has its\nsymbolical as well as its outward signification; and that, until we\nhave learned to read the Bible strictly according to the spirit, we\ncannot understand one-thousandth part of the mysteries which it\nconceals behind its veil of language; nor can we appreciate\none-thousandth part of the treasures of wisdom which lie hidden in its\npages from those who have eyes and cannot see, ears and cannot hear.\n\nAnother duty of the shepherd of ancient Palestine was to guard his\nflock from depredators, whether man or beast. Therefore the shepherd\nwas forced to carry arms; to act as a sentry during the night; and, in\nfact, to be a sort of irregular soldier. A fully-armed shepherd had\nwith him his bow, his spear, and his sword, and not even a shepherd\nlad was without his sling and the great quarter-staff which is even\nnow universally carried by the tribes along the Nile--a staff as thick\nas a man's wrist, and six or seven feet in length. He was skilled in\nthe use of all these weapons, especially in that of the sling.\n\nIn England, in these days, the sling is only considered as a mere toy,\nwhereas, before the introduction of fire-arms, it was one of the most\nformidable weapons that could be wielded by light troops. Round and\nsmooth stones weighing three or four ounces were the usual\nprojectiles, and, by dint of constant practice from childhood, the\nslingers could aim with a marvellous precision. Of this fact we have a\nnotable instance in David, who knew that the sling and the five stones\nin the hand of an active youth unencumbered by armour, and wearing\nmerely the shepherd's simple tunic, were more than a match for all the\nponderous weapons of the gigantic Philistine.\n\nIt has sometimes been the fashion to attribute the successful aim of\nDavid to a special miracle, whereas those who are acquainted with\nancient weapons know well that no miracle was wrought, because none\nwas needed; a good slinger at that time being as sure of his aim as a\ngood rifleman of our days.\n\nThe sling was in constant requisition, being used both in directing\nthe Sheep and in repelling enemies: a stone skilfully thrown in front\nof a straying Sheep being a well-understood signal that the animal had\nbetter retrace its steps if it did not want to feel the next stone on\nits back.\n\nPassing his whole life with his flock, the shepherd was identified\nwith his Sheep far more than is the case in this country. He knew all\nhis Sheep by sight, he called them all by their names, and they all\nknew him and recognised his voice. He did not drive them, but he led\nthem, walking in their front, and they following him. Sometimes he\nwould play with them, pretending to run away while they pursued him,\nexactly as an infant-school teacher plays with the children.\n\nConsequently, they looked upon him as their protector as well as their\nfeeder, and were sure to follow wherever he led them.\n\nWe must all remember how David, who had passed all his early years as\na shepherd, speaks of God as the Shepherd of Israel, and the people as\nSheep; never mentioning the Sheep as being driven, but always as being\nled. \"Thou leddest Thy people like a flock, by the hands of Moses and\nAaron\" (Ps. lxxvii. 20); \"The Lord is my Shepherd.... He leadeth me\nbeside the still waters\" (Ps. xxiii. 1, 2); \"Lead me in a plain path,\nbecause of mine enemies\" (Ps. xxvii. 11); together with many other\npassages too numerous to be quoted.\n\n [Illustration: SHEEP FOLLOWING THEIR SHEPHERD.\n\n \"_He calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out._\"--JOHN\n x. 3.]\n\nOur Lord Himself makes a familiar use of the same image: \"He calleth\nhis own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth\nhis own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for\nthey know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will\nflee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers\" (John x.\n3-5). And again at verse 26: \"Ye believe not, because ye are not of my\nsheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them,\nand they follow me.\"\n\nAlthough the shepherds of our own country know their Sheep by sight,\nand say that there is as much difference in the faces of Sheep as of\nmen, they have not, as a rule, attained the art of teaching their\nSheep to recognise their names. This custom, however, is still\nretained, as may be seen from a well-known passage in Hartley's\n\"Researches in Greece and the Levant:\"--\n\n\"Having had my attention directed last night to the words in John x.\n3, I asked my man if it were usual in Greece to give names to the\nsheep. He informed me that it was, and that the sheep obeyed the\nshepherd when he called them by their names. This morning I had an\nopportunity of verifying the truth of this remark. Passing by a flock\nof sheep, I asked the shepherd the same question which I had put to\nthe servant, and he gave me the same answer. I then bade him call one\nof his sheep. He did so, and it instantly left its pasturage and its\ncompanions, and ran up to the hands of the shepherd, with signs of\npleasure, and with a prompt obedience which I had never before\nobserved in any other animal.\n\n\"It is also true that in this country, 'a stranger will they not\nfollow, but will flee from him.' The shepherd told me that many of his\nsheep were still wild, that they had not learned their names, but that\nby teaching them they would all learn them.\"\n\nGenerally, the shepherd was either the proprietor of the flock, or had\nat all events a share in it, of which latter arrangement we find a\nwell-known example in the bargain which Jacob made with Laban, all the\nwhite Sheep belonging to his father-in-law, and all the dark and\nspotted Sheep being his wages as shepherd. Such a man was far more\nlikely to take care of the Sheep than if he were merely a paid\nlabourer; especially in a country where the life of a shepherd was a\nlife of actual danger, and he might at any time be obliged to fight\nagainst armed robbers, or to oppose the wolf, the lion, or the bear.\nThe combat of the shepherd David with the last-mentioned animals has\nalready been noticed.\n\nIn allusion to the continual risks run by the Oriental shepherd, our\nLord makes use of the following well-known words:--\"The thief cometh\nnot but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they\nmight have life, and have it more abundantly. I am the Good Shepherd:\nthe good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is an\nhireling, ... whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and\nleaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and\nscattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth because he is an hireling,\nand careth not for the sheep.\"\n\nOwing to the continual moving of the Sheep, the shepherd had very hard\nwork during the lambing time, and was obliged to carry in his arms the\nyoung lambs which were too feeble to accompany their parents, and to\nkeep close to him those Sheep who were expected soon to become\nmothers. At that time of year the shepherd might constantly be seen at\nthe head of his flock, carrying one or two lambs in his arms,\naccompanied by their mothers.\n\nIn allusion to this fact Isaiah writes: \"His reward is with Him, and\nHis work before Him. He shall feed His flock like a shepherd; He shall\ngather the lambs with His arms and carry them in His bosom, and shall\ngently lead them that are with young\" (or, \"that give suck,\" according\nto the marginal reading). Here we have presented at once before us the\ngood shepherd who is no hireling, but owns the Sheep; and who\ntherefore has \"his reward with him, and his work before him;\" who\nbears the tender lambs in his arms, or lays them in the folds of his\nmantle, and so carries them in his bosom, and leads by his side their\nyet feeble mothers.\n\nFrequent mention is made of the folds in which the Sheep are penned;\nand as these folds differed--and still differ--materially from those\nof our own land, we shall miss the force of several passages of\nScripture if we do not understand their form, and the materials of\nwhich they were built. Our folds consist merely of hurdles, moveable\nat pleasure, and so low that a man can easily jump over them, and so\nfragile that he can easily pull them down. Moreover, the Sheep are\nfrequently enclosed within the fold while they are at pasture.\n\n [Illustration: THE SHEEP.\n\n \"He maketh me to lie down in green pastures.\"--PSALM xxiii. 2.]\n\nIf any one should entertain such an idea of the Oriental fold, he\nwould not see the force of the well-known passage in which our Lord\ncompares the Church to a sheep fold, and Himself to the door. \"He that\nentereth not by the door into the sheep fold, but climbeth up some\nother way, the same is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in\nby the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter openeth,\nand the sheep hear his voice.... All that ever came before me\nare thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. I\nam the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall\ngo in and out, and find pasture.\"\n\nHad the fold here mentioned been a simple enclosure of hurdles, such\nan image could not have been used. It is evident that the fold to\nwhich allusion was made, and which was probably in sight at the time\nwhen Jesus was disputing with the Pharisees, was a structure of some\npretensions; that it had walls which a thief could only enter by\nclimbing over them--not by \"breaking through\" them, as in the case of\na mud-walled private house; and that it had a gate, which was guarded\nby a watchman.\n\nIn fact, the fold was a solid and enduring building, made of stone.\nThus in Numbers xxxii. it is related that the tribes of Reuben and\nGad, who had great quantities of Sheep and other cattle, asked for the\neastward side of Jordan as a pasture-ground, promising to go and fight\nfor the people, but previously to build fortified cities for their\nfamilies, and folds for their cattle, the folds being evidently, like\nthe cities, buildings of an enduring nature.\n\nIf the reader will refer to the upper left-hand corner of the large\nillustration, he will see in the distance the fold into which the\nsheep are gathered at nightfall, and will perceive that it is a strong\nstone building, with walls of a considerable height. In some places\nthe folds are simply rock caverns, partly natural and partly\nartificial, often enlarged by a stone wall built outside it. It was\nthe absence of these rock caverns on the east side of Jordan that\ncompelled the Reubenites and Gadites to build folds for themselves,\nwhereas on the opposite side places of refuge were comparatively\nabundant.\n\nSee, for example, the well-known history related in 1 Sam. xxiii.\nxxiv. David and his miscellaneous band of warriors, some six hundred\nin number, were driven out of the cities by the fear of Saul, and were\nobliged to pass their time in the wilderness, living in the \"strong\nholds\" (xxiii. 14, 19), which we find immediately afterwards to be\nrock caves (ver. 25). These caves were of large extent, being able to\nshelter these six hundred warriors, and, on one memorable occasion, to\nconceal them so completely as they stood along the sides, that Saul,\nwho had just come out of the open air, was not able to discern them\nin the dim light, and David even managed to approach him unseen, and\ncut off a portion of his outer robe.\n\nThat this particular cave was a sheepfold we learn from xxiv. 2-4:\n\"Then Saul took three thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went\nto seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats. And he\ncame to the sheepcotes by the way.\" Into these strongholds the Sheep\nare driven towards nightfall, and, as the flocks converge towards\ntheir resting-place, the bleatings of the sheep are almost deafening.\n\nThe shepherds as well as their flocks found shelter in these caves,\nmaking them their resting-places while they were living the strange,\nwild, pastoral life among the hills; and at the present day many of\nthe smaller caves and \"holes of the rock\" exhibit the vestiges of\nhuman habitation in the shape of straw, hay, and other dried herbage,\nwhich has been used for beds, just as we now find the rude couches of\nthe coast-guard men in the cliff caves of our shores.\n\nThe dogs which are attached to the sheepfolds were, as they are now,\nthe faithful servants of man, although, as has already been related,\nthey are not made the companions of man as is the case with ourselves.\nLean, gaunt, hungry, and treated with but scant kindness, they are yet\nfaithful guardians against the attack of enemies. They do not, as do\nour sheepdogs, assist in driving the flocks, because the Sheep are not\ndriven, but led, but they are invaluable as nocturnal sentries.\nCrouching together outside the fold, in little knots of six or seven\ntogether, they detect the approach of wild animals, and at the first\nsign of the wolf or the jackal they bark out a defiance, and scare\naway the invaders. It is strange that the old superstitious idea of\ntheir uncleanness should have held its ground through so many tens of\ncenturies; but, down to the present day, the shepherd of Palestine,\nthough making use of the dog as a guardian of his flock, treats the\nanimal with utter contempt, not to say cruelty, beating and kicking\nthe faithful creature on the least provocation, and scarcely giving it\nsufficient food to keep it alive.\n\nSometimes the Sheep are brought up by hand at home. \"House-lamb,\" as\nwe call it, is even now common, and the practice of house-feeding\npeculiar in the old Scriptural times.\n\nWe have an allusion to this custom in the well-known parable of the\nprophet Nathan: \"The poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb,\nwhich he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with\nhim, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of\nhis own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter\" (2\nSam. xii. 3). A further, though less distinct, allusion is made to\nthis practice in Isaiah vii. 21: \"It shall come to pass in that day,\nthat a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep.\"\n\nHow the Sheep thus brought up by hand were fattened may be conjectured\nfrom the following passage in Mr. D. Urquhart's valuable work on the\nLebanon:--\n\n\"In the month of June, they buy from the shepherds, when pasturage has\nbecome scarce and sheep are cheap, two or three sheep; these they feed\nby hand. After they have eaten up the old grass and the provender\nabout the doors, they get vine leaves, and, after the silkworms have\nbegun to spin, mulberry leaves. They purchase them on trial, and the\ntest is appetite. If a sheep does not feed well, they return it after\nthree days. To increase their appetite they wash them twice a day,\nmorning and evening, a care they never bestow on their own bodies.\n\n\"If the sheep's appetite does not come up to their standard, they use\na little gentle violence, folding for them forced leaf-balls and\nintroducing them into their mouths. The mulberry has the property of\nmaking them fat and tender. At the end of four months the sheep they\nhad bought at eighty piastres will sell for one hundred and forty, or\nwill realize one hundred and fifty.\n\n\"The sheep is killed, skinned, and hung up. The fat is then removed;\nthe flesh is cut from the bones, and hung up in the sun. Meanwhile,\nthe fat has been put in a cauldron on the fire, and as soon as it has\ncome to boil, the meat is laid on. The proportion of the fat to the\nlean is as four to ten, eight 'okes' fat and twenty lean. A little\nsalt is added, it is simmered for an hour, and then placed in jars for\nthe use of the family during the year.\n\n\"The large joints are separated and used first, as not fit for keeping\nlong. The fat, with a portion of the lean, chopped fine, is what\nserves for cooking the 'bourgoul,' and is called _Dehen_. The sheep\nare of the fat-tailed variety, and the tails are the great delicacy.\"\n\nThis last sentence reminds us that there are two breeds of Sheep in\nPalestine. One much resembles our ordinary English Sheep, while the\nother is a very different animal, being to the ordinary Sheep what the\ngreyhound is to the rough terrier. It is much taller on its legs,\nlarger-boned, and long-nosed. Only the rams have horns, and they are\nnot twisted spirally like those of our own Sheep, but come backwards,\nand then curl round so that the point comes under the ear. The great\npeculiarity of this Sheep is the tail, which is simply prodigious in\npoint of size, and is an enormous mass of fat. Indeed, the long-legged\nand otherwise lean animal seems to concentrate all its fat in the\ntail, which, as has been well observed, appears to abstract both flesh\nand fat from the rest of the body. So great is this strange\ndevelopment, that the tail alone will sometimes weigh one-fifth as\nmuch as the entire animal. A similar breed of Sheep is found in\nSouthern Africa and other parts of the world. In some places, the tail\ngrows to such an enormous size that, in order to keep so valuable a\npart of the animal from injury, it is fastened to a small board,\nsupported by a couple of wheels, so that the Sheep literally wheels\nits own tail in a cart. It has been thought by some systematic\nnaturalists that this variety is a distinct species, and the\nbroad-tailed breeds of Sheep have, in consequence, been distinguished\nby several names. For example, the present variety is called _Ovis\nlaticaudatus_ by several authors, _Ovis laticauda platyceros_ by\nanother, and _Ovis cauda obesa_ by another. The broad-tailed Sheep of\nTartary is called _Ovis steatopyga_. Another author calls it _Ovis\nmacrocercus_; and the broad-tailed Sheep of Southern Africa is called\n_Ovis Capensis_. Yet they are in reality one and the same variety of\nthe common domesticated Sheep, differing in some particulars according\nto the conditions in which they are placed, but having really no\nspecific distinction. It is, by the way, from the wool of the unborn\nbroad-tailed Sheep that the much-prized Astrachan fur is made.\n\nThe various Scriptural writers seem never to have noticed the\ndifference between the breeds of Sheep; the names that are employed\ndenoting the different ages and sexes of the Sheep, but having no\nreference to the breed.\n\nFor example, the word \"T\u00e2leh\" signifies a very young sucking lamb,\nsuch as is mentioned in 1 Sam. vii. 9: \"And Samuel took a sucking lamb\n(T\u00e2leh), and offered it for a burnt offering wholly unto the Lord.\"\nThe same word is used in Isa. lxv. 25:\n\n\"The wolf and the lamb (t\u00e2leh) shall feed together;\" the force of this\nwell-known passage being much increased by the correct rendering of\nthe word \"t\u00e2leh.\" The Jewish Bible renders the word as \"a lamb of\nmilk.\"\n\nThe word \"kebes,\" or \"keves,\" (the e being pronounced like the same\nletter in the word \"seven\") signifies a male lamb of a year or so old,\nthe feminine being \"kebesah.\" When the young lamb was weaned, and was\nsent to pasture, it was called by another name, _i.e._ \"kar,\" this\nword being evidently derived from the Hebrew verb which signifies to\nskip. The adult ram is signified by the word \"ayil,\" or \"ail,\" and the\newe by \"rakal.\"\n\nFrequent reference to the fat of the tail is made in the Authorized\nVersion of the Scriptures, though in terms which would not be\nunderstood did we not know that the Sheep which is mentioned in those\npassages is the long-tailed Sheep of Syria. See, for example, the\nhistory narrated in Exod. xxix. 22, where special details are given as\nto the ceremony by which Aaron and his sons were consecrated to the\npriesthood. \"Thou shalt take of the ram the fat and the rump, and the\nfat that covereth the inwards, and the caul above the liver, and the\ntwo kidneys, and the fat that is upon them.\" In the Jewish Bible the\npassage is given with much more precision, \"Thou shalt take of the ram\nthe fat, _and the fat tail_,\" &c. The same rendering is used in Lev.\niii. 9: \"And he shall offer of the sacrifice of the feast offering a\nfire offering unto the Eternal; the fat thereof, and the whole fat\ntail shall he take off hard by the backbone; and the fat that covereth\nthe inwards, and all the fat that is upon the inwards.\"\n\nBut though this particular breed is not very distinctly mentioned in\nthe Bible, the Talmudical writers have many allusions to it. In the\nMischna these broad-tailed Sheep are not allowed to leave their folds\non the Sabbath-day, because by wheeling their little tail-waggons\nbehind them they would break the Sabbath. The writers describe the\ntail very graphically, comparing its shape to that of a saddle, and\nsaying that it is fat, without bones, heavy and long, and looks as if\nthe whole body were continued beyond the hind-legs, and thence hung\ndown in place of a tail.\n\nThe Rabbinical writers treat rather fully of the Sheep, and give some\nvery amusing advice respecting their management. If the ewes cannot be\nfattened in the ordinary manner, that end may be achieved by tying up\nthe udder so that the milk cannot flow, and the elements which would\nhave furnished milk are forced to produce fat. If the weather should\nbe chilly at the shearing time, and there is danger of taking cold\nafter the wool is removed, the shepherd should dip a sponge in oil and\ntie it on the forehead of the newly-shorn animal. Or, if he should not\nhave a sponge by him, a woollen rag will do as well. The same potent\nremedy is also efficacious if the Sheep should be ill in lambing time.\n\nThat the Sheep is liable to the attack of the gadfly, which deposits\nits eggs in the nostrils of the unfortunate animal, was as well known\nin the ancient as in modern times. It is scarcely necessary to mention\nthat the insect in question is the _\u00c6strus ovis_. Instinctively aware\nof the presence of this insidious and dreaded enemy, which, though so\napparently insignificant, is as formidable a foe as any of the beasts\nof prey, the Sheep display the greatest terror at the sharp, menacing\nsound produced by the gadfly's wings as the insect sweeps through the\nair towards its destination. They congregate together, placing their\nheads almost in contact with each other, snort and paw the ground in\ntheir terror, and use all means in their power to prevent the fly from\naccomplishing its purpose.\n\nWhen a gadfly succeeds in attaining its aim, it rapidly deposits an\negg or two in the nostril, and then leaves them. The tiny eggs are\nsoon hatched by the natural heat of the animal, and the young larv\u00e6\ncrawl up the nostril towards the frontal sinus. There they remain\nuntil they are full-grown, when they crawl through the nostrils, fall\non the ground, burrow therein, and in the earth undergo their changes\ninto the pupal and perfect stages.\n\nIt need hardly be said that an intelligent shepherd would devote\nhimself to the task of killing every gadfly which he could find, and,\nas these insects are fond of basking on sunny rocks or tree-trunks,\nthis is no very difficult matter.\n\nThe Rabbinical writers, however, being totally ignorant of practical\nentomology, do not seem to have recognised the insect until it had\nreached its full larval growth. They say that the rams manage to shake\nthe grubs out of their nostrils by butting at one another in mimic\nwarfare, and that the ewes, which are hornless, and are therefore\nincapable of relieving themselves by such means, ought to be supplied\nwith plants which will make them sneeze, so that they may shake out\nthe grubs by the convulsive jerkings of the head caused by inhaling\nthe irritating substance.\n\nThe same writers also recommend that the rams should be furnished with\nstrong leathern collars.\n\nWhen the flock is on the march, the rams always go in the van, and,\nbeing instinctively afraid of their ancient enemy the wolf, they\ncontinually raise their heads and look about them. This line of\nconduct irritates the wolves, who attack the foremost rams and seize\nthem by the throat. If, therefore, a piece of stout leather be\nfastened round the ram's neck, the wolf is baffled, and runs off in\nsullen despair.\n\nGenerally, the oldest ram is distinguished by a bell, and, when the\nflock moves over the hilly slopes, the Sheep walk in file after the\nleader, making narrow paths, which are very distinct from a distance,\nbut are scarcely perceptible when the foot of the traveller is\nactually upon them. From this habit has arisen an ancient proverb, \"As\nthe sheep after the sheep, so the daughter after the mother,\" a saying\nwhich is another form of our own familiar proverb, \"What is bred in\nthe bone will not come out of the flesh.\"\n\n\nWe now come to the Sheep considered with reference to its uses. First\nand foremost the Sheep was, and still is, one of the chief means of\nsubsistence, being to the pastoral inhabitants of Palestine what the\noxen are to the pastoral inhabitants of Southern Africa.\n\nTo ordinary persons the flesh of the Sheep was a seldom-tasted luxury;\ngreat men might eat it habitually, \"faring sumptuously every day,\" and\nwe find that, among the glories of Solomon's reign, the sacred\nchronicler has thought it worth while to mention that part of the\ndaily provision for his household included one hundred Sheep. No\nparticular pains seem to have been taken about the cooking of the\nanimal, which seems generally to have been boiled. As, however, in\nsuch a climate the flesh could not be kept for the purpose of making\nit tender, as is the case in this part of the world, it was cooked as\nsoon as the animal was killed, the fibres not having time to settle\ninto the rigidity of death.\n\nGenerally, when ordinary people had the opportunity of tasting the\nflesh of the Sheep, it was on the occasion of some rejoicing,--such,\nfor example, as a marriage feast, or the advent of a guest, for whom a\nlamb or a kid was slain and cooked on the spot, a young male lamb\nbeing almost invariably chosen as less injurious than the ewe to the\nfuture prospects of the flock. Roasting over a fire was sometimes\nadopted, as was baking in an oven sunk in the ground, a remarkable\ninstance of which we shall see when we come to the Jewish sacrifices.\nBoiling, however, was the principal mode; so much so, indeed, that the\nHebrew word which signifies boiling is used to signify any kind of\ncooking, even when the meat was roasted.\n\nThe process of cooking and eating the Sheep was as follows.\n\nThe animal having been killed according to the legal form, the skin\nwas stripped off, and the body separated joint from joint, the right\nshoulder being first removed. This, it will be remembered, was the\npriest's portion; see Lev. vii. 32: \"The right shoulder shall ye give\nunto the priest for an heave offering of the sacrifices of your peace\nofferings.\" The whole of the flesh was then separated from the bones,\nand chopped small, and even the bones themselves broken up, so that\nthe marrow might not be lost.\n\nA reference to this custom is found in Micah iii. 2, 3, \"Who pluck off\ntheir skin from off them, and their flesh from off their bones; who\nalso eat the flesh of my people ... and they break their bones, and\nchop them in pieces, as for the pot, and as flesh within the caldron.\"\nThe reader will now understand more fully the force of the prophecy,\n\"He keepeth all His bones: not one of them is broken\" (Psa. xxxiv.\n20).\n\nThe mixed mass of bones and flesh was then put into the caldron, which\nwas generally filled with water, but sometimes with milk, as is the\ncustom with the Bedouins of the present day, whose manners are in many\nrespects identical with those of the early Jews. It has been thought\nby some commentators that the injunction not to \"seethe a kid in his\nmother's milk\" (Deut. xiv. 21) referred to this custom. I believe,\nhowever, that the expression \"in his mother's milk\" does not signify\nthat the flesh of the kid might not be boiled in its mother's milk,\nbut that a kid might not be taken which was still in its mother's\nmilk, _i.e._ unweaned.\n\nSalt and spices were generally added to it; see Ezek. xxiv. 10: \"Heap\non wood, kindle the fire, consume the flesh, and spice it well.\" The\nsurface was carefully skimmed, and, when the meat was thoroughly\ncooked, it and the broth were served up separately. The latter was\nused as a sort of sauce, into which unleavened bread was dipped. So in\nJudges vi. 19 we read that when Gideon was visited by the angel,\naccording to the hospitable custom of the land, he \"made ready a kid,\nand unleavened cakes of an ephah of flour: the flesh he put in a\nbasket, and he put the broth in a pot, and brought it out unto him\nunder the oak, and presented it to him.\"\n\nValuable, however, as was the Sheep for this purpose, there has always\nexisted a great reluctance to kill the animal, the very sight of the\nflocks being an intense gratification to a pastoral Oriental. The\nprincipal part of the food supplied by the Sheep was, and is still,\nthe milk; which afforded abundant food without thinning the number of\nthe flock. As all know who have tasted it, the milk of the Sheep is\npeculiarly rich, and in the East is valued much more highly than that\nof cattle. The milk was seldom drunk in a fresh state, as is usually\nthe case with ourselves, but was suffered to become sour, curdled, and\nsemi-solid.\n\nThis custom exists at the present day, the curdled milk being known by\nthe name of \"leben.\" It is worthy of notice that all the Kaffir tribes\nof Southern Africa, who live almost entirely on milk, also use it\ncurdled, under the name of \"amasi,\" and utterly refuse to drink it in\nits fresh state, looking upon new milk much as we should look upon\nunfermented ale. It is curdled by being placed in a vessel together\nwith some of the already curdled milk, and the usual plan is to\npreserve for this special purpose a vessel which is never wholly\nemptied, and which is found to curdle the milk with great rapidity.\n\n\"Leben\" is exceedingly nutritious, and especially adapted for\nchildren, who, when accustomed to it, will very much prefer it to the\nmilk in a fresh state. Two separate words are used in the Old\nTestament to distinguish fresh from curdled milk, the former being\ncalled Ch\u00e2l\u00e2b, and the latter Chemhah.\n\nFor butter (if we may accept the rendering of the word) the milk of\nthe cow or the goat seems to have been preferred, although that of the\nSheep also furnishes it. This distinction is drawn even in the\nearliest days of Jewish history, and in the Song of Moses (Deut.\nxxxii. 13, 14) we find this passage, \"He made him to suck honey out of\nthe rock, and oil out of the flinty rock; butter of kine and milk of\nsheep, with fat of lambs.\"\n\nThere is, however, a little uncertainty about the word which is\ntranslated as butter, and as this word is only used in a very few\npassages, we will refer briefly to them. The first mention of butter\noccurs in Gen. xviii. 8, where we are told that Abraham \"took butter,\nand milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them.\"\nIn this passage we find the words \"chemhah\" and \"ch\u00e2l\u00e2h\" are used, the\nformer being translated in the Jewish Bible as \"clotted cream.\"\nAbraham therefore gave his angelic guests their choice of milk, both\nfresh and curdled. In the passage from Deut. xxxii. 14, which has\nalready been mentioned, the same words are used, as they are in the\nwell-known passage in the history of Jael and Sisera (Judges v. 25):\n\"He asked water, and she gave him milk (ch\u00e2l\u00e2b); she brought forth\nbutter (chemhah) in a lordly dish.\"\n\nAgain, the butter which Shobi, Machir, and Barzillai brought to David,\ntogether with honey, was the chemhah (2 Sam. xvii. 29). In the\nfamiliar passage, \"Butter and honey shall He eat\" (Isa. vii. 15), the\nsame word is used; and so it is in Job xx. 17, \"He shall not see the\nrivers, the floods, the brooks of honey and butter.\"\n\nBut in Prov. xxx. 33, \"Surely the churning (mitz) of milk (ch\u00e2l\u00e2b)\nbringeth forth butter\" (chemhah), we have a proof that the chemhah,\nwhatever it may be, is produced by the churning or pressure of the\nfresh milk. As to the exact force of the word \"mitz\" there is a little\ndoubt, some persons translating it as pressure, and others as\nagitating or shaking, a movement which, when applied to milk, would be\nrightly translated as churning. This latter interpretation is\nstrengthened by the context, \"Surely the churning (mitz) of milk\nbringeth forth butter, and the wringing (mitz) of the nose bringeth\nforth blood.\"\n\nIt is most probable that the chemhah may signify both clotted cream\nand butter, just as many words in our language have two or more\nsignifications. Some commentators have thought that the ancient Jews\nwere not acquainted with butter. This theory, however, is scarcely\ntenable. Butter is used largely at the present day, and is made after\nthe simple fashion of the East, by shaking the cream in a vessel,\nexactly as it is made among the black tribes of Southern Africa and\nother parts of the world. And, considering the unchanging character of\ninstitutions in the East, we may assume as certain that the ancient\ninhabitants of Palestine were, like their modern successors,\nacquainted both with the clotted cream and true butter.\n\nMoreover, two substances, butter and honey, which are mentioned in\nSamuel, in Job, and in Isaiah, as connected with each other, are still\neaten together in the East.\n\nA reference to the milk of Sheep is to be found in the New Testament:\n\"Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who\nfeedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?\" (1 Cor. ix.\n7).\n\nIn this country the milk of the Sheep is scarcely ever used, but in\nScotland, especially in the great Sheep-feeding districts, its milk is\nvalued as it deserves, and is specially employed for the manufacture\nof cheese.\n\nThe mention of cheese brings us to another branch of the subject.\nGesenius thinks that the chemhah mentioned in Prov. xxx. must be a\nkind of cheese, on account of the word \"mitz,\" _i.e._ pressure. Thus\nthe word \"cheese\" occurs three times in the Authorized Version of the\nBible, and in all these passages a different word is used. We will\ntake them in their order. The first mention occurs in 1 Sam. xvii. 17,\n18, \"And Jesse said unto David his son, Take now for thy brethren an\nephah of this parched corn, and these ten loaves, and run to the camp\nto thy brethren; and carry these ten cheeses unto the captain of their\nthousand.\" In this passage the word which is rendered \"cheeses\" in the\nAuthorized Version is \"charitz,\" a term which is translated in the\nJewish Bible as \"slices of cheeses,\" on account of the etymology of\nthe word, which is derived from a root signifying slicing or cutting.\n\nAnother word is used in 2 Sam. xvii. 29, where, among the provisions\nthat Barzillai brought to David, is mentioned \"cheese of kine.\" The\nHebrew word \"shaph\u00f4th,\" which is translated as cheese, derives its\norigin from a root signifying to scrape.\n\nThe third term translated as cheese is to be found in Job x. 10, \"Hast\nthou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese?\" The word\n\"geb\u00eenah,\" which is here translated as \"cheese\" both in the Authorized\nVersion and the Jewish Bible, is derived from a root signifying to\ncurdle.\n\nHere, then, we have three passages, in each of which a different word\nis mentioned, and yet these words have been translated in a precisely\nsimilar manner, both in our own version and in the Jewish Bible. The\nsubject is so well summed up by the Rev. W. L. Bevan, in Smith's\n\"Dictionary of the Bible,\" that we may insert here the passage:--\n\n\"It is difficult to decide how far these terms correspond with our\nnotion of _cheese_, for they simply imply various degrees of\ncoagulation. It may be observed that cheese is not at the present day\ncommon among the Bedouin Arabs, butter being decidedly preferred. But\nthere is a substance closely corresponding to those mentioned in 1\nSam. xvii., 2 Sam. xvii., consisting of coagulated buttermilk, which\nis dried until it becomes quite hard, and is then ground. The Arabs\neat it with butter. (Burckhardt, 'Notes on the Bedouins,' i. 60.)\n\n\"In reference to this subject, it is noticeable that the ancients seem\ngenerally to have used either butter or cheese, but not both. Thus the\nGreeks had in reality but one expression for the two; for [Greek:\nbo\u00fateron] = [Greek: bo\u00fbs-tur\u00f3s] ('cheese of kine'). The Romans used\ncheese extensively, while all nomad tribes preferred butter. The\ndistinction between cheese proper and coagulated milk seems to be\nreferred to in Pliny xi. 96.\"\n\nThe reader will observe that this opinion exactly coincides with that\nwhich was expressed a few lines above, namely, that the Hebrews used\none word to express both butter and cheese. The coagulated and dried\nbuttermilk--_i.e._ the \"leben\" of the Bedouins, and the \"amasi\" of the\nKaffir tribe--may well be the \"shaph\u00f4th b\u00e2k\u00e2r,\" or \"scrapings of the\nkine,\" as being necessarily scraped off the stone or metal plate on\nwhich it was dried.\n\n\nWe now come to a portion of the Sheep scarcely less important than the\nflesh and the milk, _i.e._ the fleece, or wool.\n\nIn the ancient times nearly the whole of the clothing was made of\nwool, especially the most valuable part of it, namely the large\nmantle, or \"haick,\" in which the whole person could be folded, and\nwhich was the usual covering during sleep. The wool, therefore, would\nbe an article of great national value; and so we find that when the\nking of Moab paid his tribute in kind to the king of Israel, it was\ncarefully specified that the Sheep should not be shorn. \"And Mesha\nking of Moab was a sheep-master, and rendered unto the king of Israel\nan hundred thousand lambs, and an hundred thousand rams, with the\nwool.\"\n\nThe wool of the Sheep of Palestine differed extremely in value; some\nkinds being course and rough, while others were long, fine, and soft.\n\nThe wool was dressed in those times much as it is at present, being\ncarded and then spun with the spindle, the distaff being apparently\nunused, and the wool simply drawn out by the hand. The shape of the\nspindle was much like that of the well-known flat spinning-tops that\ncome from Japan--namely, a disc through which passes an axle. A smart\ntwirl given by the fingers to the axle makes the disc revolve very\nrapidly, and its weight causes the rotation to continue for a\nconsiderable time. Spinning the wool was exclusively the task of the\nwomen, a custom which prevailed in this country up to a very recent\ntime, and which still traditionally survives in the term \"spinster,\"\nand in the metaphorical use of the word \"distaff\" as synonymous with a\nwoman's proper work.\n\nOnly a few passages occur in the Scriptures in which spinning is\nmentioned. In Exod. xxxv. 25 we are told that, when the people were\npreparing the materials for the Tabernacle, \"all the women that were\nwise-hearted did spin with their hands, and brought that which they\nhad spun, both of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, and of fine\nlinen.\" It is true that in Prov. xxxi. 19 there is mention both of the\ndistaff and spindle: \"She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her\nhand holds the distaff;\" but the word which is translated as \"distaff\"\nis more probably the flat disc which gave to the spindle its whirling\nmovement. Buxtorf's \"Hebrew Lexicon\" favours this interpretation,\ntranslating the word as \"verticulum, quasi fusi directorium,\" the word\nbeing derived from a root signifying straight, or to keep something\nelse straight.\n\nThe only other reference to spinning is the well-known passage,\n\"Consider the lilies, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they\nspin: and yet I say unto you, That Solomon in all his glory was not\narrayed like one of these.\"\n\nWhen spun into threads, the wool was woven in the simple loom which\nhas existed up to our own day, and which is identical in its general\nprinciples throughout a very large portion of the world. It consisted\nof a framework of wood, at one end of which was placed the \"beam\" to\nwhich the warp was attached; and at the other end was the \"pin\" on\nwhich the cloth was rolled as it was finished.\n\nThe reader may remember that when Delilah was cajoling Samson to tell\nher the secret of his strength, he said, \"If thou weavest the seven\nlocks of my head with the web.\" So, as he slept, she interwove his\nlong hair with the fabric which was on her loom, and, to make sure,\n\"fastened it with the pin,\" _i.e._ wove it completely into the cloth\nwhich was rolled round the pin. So firmly had she done so, that when\nhe awoke he could not disentangle his hair, but left the house with\nthe whole of the loom, the beam and the pin, and the web hanging to\nhis head.\n\nThe threads of the warp were separated by slight rods, and the woof\nwas passed between them with a shuttle shaped something like a sword,\nwhich answered the double purpose of conducting the thread, and of\nstriking it with the edge so as to make it lie regularly in its place.\n\nThe loom may either have been upright or horizontal, but was probably\nthe former, the weaver standing at his work, beginning at the top, and\nso weaving down. The seamless coat or tunic of our Lord was thus made,\nbeing \"woven from the top throughout,\" like the Roman garments of a\nsimilar character, called _rect\u00e6_, signifying that they were woven in\nan upright loom. According to the Jewish traditions, the sacerdotal\ngarments were thus made in one piece.\n\nAllusion is made to the speed with which the weaver throws his shuttle\nin Job vii. 6, \"My days are swifter than a weaver's shuttle, and are\npassed without hope.\" When the fabric was finished, the weaver cut it\naway from the thrum, an operation which is noticed in the following\npassage of Isa. xxxviii. 12, \"Mine age is departed, and is removed\nfrom me like a shepherd's tent: I have cut off like a weaver my life:\nHe will cut me off with pining sickness.\" The latter sentence is\ntranslated in the Jewish Bible \"He will cut me off from the thrum,\"\nand the same rendering is in the marginal note of the Authorized\nVersion.\n\nThe reader may remember a remarkable prohibition in Deut. xxii. 11,\n\"Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as woollen and linen\ntogether,\" a prohibition which was sufficiently important to be\nrepeated in Lev. xix. 19. Now the word which is rendered as \"divers\nsorts\" in one passage and as \"mingled\" in the other has been variously\ninterpreted, some persons rendering it as motley, some as spurious or\ncounterfeit, and some as spotted like a leopard. It is probable,\nhowever, that our Authorized Version is the correct one, and that we\nmay accept the exposition of Josephus on the subject. He states that\nsuch garments, _i.e._ of linen warp and woollen woof, were intended\nwholly for sacerdotal use, and were in consequence prohibited to the\nlaity.\n\nWool when taken from the Sheep was of various colours, according to\nthe animal from which it was shorn; but the most valuable was\nnecessarily the white variety, which might either be used without\ndyeing, or stained of any favourite hue. Several allusions to the\nwhiteness of such wool are made in the Scriptures. See for example Ps.\ncxlvii. 16, \"He giveth snow like wool, and scattereth the hoarfrost\nlike ashes.\" Also Isa. i. 18, \"Though your sins be as scarlet, they\nshall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall\nbe as wool.\" In the prophet Daniel the Ancient of Days is described as\nhaving \"His garments as white as snow, and the hair of His head like\nthe pure wool.\" And in Rev. i. 14 the same image is repeated, \"His\nhead and His hairs were white like wool, as white as snow.\"\n\nThe reader will not fail to observe that in all these passages wool\nand snow are mentioned as of equal whiteness. The reference is\nprobably made to the newly-carded wool, which is peculiarly white and\nsoft.\n\nWool was often dyed of various colours; blue, purple, and scarlet\nbeing those which were generally employed. The rams' skins which\nformed part of the covering of the Tabernacle were ordered to be dyed\nscarlet, partly on account of the significance of the colour, and\npartly because none but the best and purest fleeces would be chosen\nfor so rare and costly a dye. How the colour was produced we shall\nlearn towards the end of the volume.\n\nAs with us, sheep-shearing was always a time of great rejoicing and\nrevelry, which seem often to have been carried beyond the bounds of\nsobriety. Thus when Nabal had gathered together his three thousand\nSheep in Carmel, and held a shearing festival, David sent to ask for\nsome provisions for his band, and was refused in accordance with the\ndisposition of the man, who had inflamed his naturally churlish nature\nwith wine. \"He held a feast in his house, like the feast of a king:\nand Nabal's heart was merry within him, for he was very drunken\" (1\nSam. xxv. 36).\n\nThe same was probably the case when Laban was shearing his Sheep (Gen.\nxxxi. 19). Otherwise it would scarcely have been possible for Jacob to\nhave gone away unknown to Laban, taking with him his wives and\nchildren, his servants, his camels, and his flocks, the rapid increase\nof which had excited the jealousy of his uncle, and which were so\nnumerous that, in fear of his brother Esau, he divided them into two\nbands, and yet was able to select from them a present to his brother,\nconsisting in all of nearly six hundred sheep, camels, oxen, goats,\nand asses.\n\nSometimes the shepherds and others who lived in pastoral districts\nmade themselves coats of the skins of the Sheep, with the wool still\nadhering to it. The custom extends to the present day, and even in\nmany parts of Europe the sheep-skin dress of the shepherds is a\nfamiliar sight to the traveller. The skin was sometimes tanned and\nused as leather, but was considered as inferior to that of the goat.\nMr. Tristram conjectures that the leathern \"girdle\" worn by St. John\nthe Baptist was probably the untanned sheep-skin coat which has been\njust mentioned. So it is said of the early Christians, that \"they\nwandered about in sheep-skins and goat-skins, being destitute,\nafflicted, tormented,\" the sheep-skins in question being evidently the\nrude shepherd's coats.\n\n\nNext to the wool come the horns.\n\nIn our country we have done our best to produce a hornless breed of\nSheep, thinking the nutriment which produces the horns can be better\nexpended on the body and fleece, but in the East the horns form an\nimportant commodity, and are valued in proportion to their size.\n\nThe chief use of the ram's horn was as a vessel in which to carry\nliquids, especially those which, like oil, were poured out in small\nquantities. For this purpose a wooden plug was driven tightly into\nthe larger end, so as to close it completely, and frequently covered,\nin addition, with raw hide, in order to hold it firmly in its place,\nwhile the small part of the pointed end was cut off, and the aperture\nclosed with a small stopper. The old powder-horns which were formerly\nmuch used in England, and which even now are employed in Palestine and\nmany other countries, were good examples of this form of vessel.\n\nThat the horn was the favourite vessel for carrying oil is seen in\nmany passages of the Scriptures. For example, when Saul was to be\nsuperseded by David, Samuel was ordered to fill his horn with oil and\ngo to Jesse's house, 1 Sam. i. 39. The allusion was evidently to a\nvessel whose ordinary use was the holding of oil. Again, when David\nnamed Solomon his son (see 1 Kings i. 39), \"Zadok the priest took an\nhorn of oil out of the Tabernacle, and anointed Solomon,\" the oil\nbeing that which was kept in the Tabernacle for sacred purposes, and\nthe ingredients of which were so carefully chosen, for it was to be an\n\"oil of holy ointment, an ointment compounded after the art of the\napothecary (or perfumer), which shall be an holy anointing oil\" (Ex.\nxxx. 25).\n\nThe horn of the ram had also a national value, as from it were made\nthe sacred trumpets which played so important a part in the history of\nthe Jewish nation. There is no doubt that the primitive trumpets were\noriginally formed either from the horn of an animal, such as the ox,\nthe large-horned antelopes, the sheep, and the goat, and that in\nprocess of time they were made of metal, generally copper or silver.\n\nReferences are frequently made in the Bible to these trumpets, for\nwhich there were different names, probably on account of their\ndifferent forms. These names are, however, very loosely rendered in\nour version, the same word being sometimes translated the \"cornet\" and\nsometimes the \"trumpet.\" Putting aside, however, these points of\ndifference, we have chiefly to remark the fact that trumpets made of\nrams' horns were ordered by the Mosaic law to be sounded at certain\ntimes, and that their notes formed an important part of the ritual.\n\nEach jubilee year, for example, was ushered in by the blasts of the\nsacred trumpets. \"Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubilee to\nsound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement\nshall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land\" (Lev. xxv.\n9). Then there was the festival known as the Feast of Trumpets. \"In\nthe seventh month, on the first day of the month, ye shall have an\nholy convocation; ye shall do no servile work: it is a day of blowing\nthe trumpets unto you\" (Numb. xxix. 1).\n\nPerhaps the most prominent instance of the blowing of the sacred\ntrumpet may be found in the familiar passage in the book of Joshua\n(ch. vi.) in which is described the fall of Jericho. \"Ye shall compass\nthe city, all ye men of war, and go about the city once. This ye shall\ndo six days. And seven priests shall bear before the ark seven\ntrumpets of rams' horns (or jubilee cornets); and the seventh day ye\nshall compass the city seven times, and the priests shall blow with\nthe trumpets. And it shall come to pass, when they make a long blast\nwith the rams' horns, and when ye hear the sound of the trumpet, all\nthe people shall shout with a great shout; and the wall of the city\nshall fall down flat, and the people shall ascend up every man\nstraight before him.\"\n\nTrumpets were also used as signals to the people. \"Declare ye in\nJudah, and publish in Jerusalem, and say, Blow ye the trumpet in the\nland: cry, gather together and say, Assemble yourselves, and let us go\ninto the defenced cities\" (Jer. iv. 5). And on that great and solemn\nday when the law was given from Mount Sinai the signal to the people\nwas the sound of the trumpet (or cornet, as the word is translated in\nthe margin). \"And it came to pass on the third day in the morning,\nthat there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the\nmount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the\npeople that was in the camp trembled\" (Exod. xix. 16).\n\nThe Hebrew word which is here translated as \"trumpet\" is \"shofar,\"\nwhich signifies also a horn, and is therefore very rightly translated\nin the margin and in the Jewish Bible as \"cornet.\" What may have been\nthe shape of the shofar is evident from the fact that the same\ninstrument is used even at the present day in certain parts of the\nJewish ritual. One of these trumpets is now before me, and is shown in\nthe accompanying illustration.\n\nIn length it measures eighteen inches, _i.e._ a cubit, and it is\nformed entirely in one piece. As far as I can judge, it is made from\nthe left horn of the broad-tailed Sheep, which, as has already been\nremarked, is not spiral, but flattish, curved backwards, and forming\nnearly a circle, the point passing under the ear. This structure,\nadded to the large size of the horn, adapts it well for its purpose.\nIn order to bring it to the proper shape, the horn is softened by\nheat, and is then modelled into the very form which was used by the\nJewish priests who blew the trumpet before the ark.\n\n [Illustration: RAM'S HORN TRUMPET.]\n\nAt the present day one such trumpet, at least, is found in every\nJewish community, and is kept by the man who has the privilege of\nblowing it. On the New Year's festival and the Day of Atonement the\ntrumpet is used in the Jewish ritual, and as the ceremonies connected\nwith blowing it are extremely interesting, they will be briefly\ndescribed.\n\nThe trumpeter, who is not necessarily a priest, but may be any pious\nman selected from the congregation, prepares himself by bathing, and\nat the appointed time puts on the white shirt or shroud in which Jews\nare buried. Before the trumpet is blown, a prayer is said, containing\nmany cabalistic names of angels and _malachim_, or powers. These names\nmay not be pronounced.\n\nThe Rabbi then stands, and gives out the names of the sacred tones in\ntheir succession. By the kindness of Dr. Herman Beigel, I have been\nenabled to hear the tones, and to put them into musical notes,--I\nbelieve for the first time since they have been used. The tones are\nfour in number, and are called as follows: Tekeeah (the blowing),\nSheb\u00e2rim (the repeated notes), Terooah (the note of joy), and\nTekeeah-ged\u00f4lah (the lengthened blowing). It is not very easy exactly\nto express on paper these ancient tones, but the following notes will\ngive a good idea of them.\n\n [Illustration: Tekeeah. Sheb\u00e2rim. Terooah. Tekeeah-ged\u00f4lah.]\n\nThese tones are blown in three partitions, in the following order:--\n\n PARTITION I. PARTITION II.\n\n Tekeeah. Sheb\u00e2rim. Tekeeah. Tekeeah. Terooah. Tekeeah.\n\n Tekeeah. Sheb\u00e2rim. Tekeeah. Tekeeah. Terooah. Tekeeah.\n\n Tekeeah. Sheb\u00e2rim. Tekeeah. Tekeeah. Terooah. Tekeeah.\n\n PARTITION III.\n\n Tekeeah. Sheb\u00e2rim. Terooah. Tekeeah.\n\n Tekeeah. Sheb\u00e2rim. Terooah. Tekeeah.\n\n Tekeeah. Sheb\u00e2rim. Terooah. Tekeeah-ged\u00f4lah.\n\nBetween each partition a pause is made, during which the congregation\njoin in a prayer which is full of cabalistic names of the angels who\nhave charge over the sacred tones. And, according to a beautiful\nHebrew tradition, when the trumpet is blown with the proper rites,\neach tone is transformed into an angel, who ascends to join his\nheavenly colleagues, and with them forms a crown before the throne of\nGod. So that, ever since the Jewish ritual was established, every New\nYear's festival and Day of Atonement send forth their own angels, as\nadditional jewels to the heavenly crown.\n\nThese tones are the same all over the world, and have been unchanged\nfor countless generations, so that we may be nearly certain that the\nblast before which the walls of Jericho fell were the four sacred\ntones which have just been described. The reader will perceive that\nall the tones are simply octaves, blown with more or less rapidity,\nthe short notes of Terooah being taken as quickly as the trumpeter can\nblow them, and the concluding note well swelled out, until \"the voice\nof the cornet waxes exceeding loud.\" Sometimes fifths are used instead\nof octaves.\n\nThe sounds of the shofar are very peculiar and harsh, quite unlike the\nnotes of any modern instrument. In spite, however, of the wild and\nalmost discordant harshness of the instrument, and the abrupt and even\nstartling character of the Sheb\u00e2rim and Terooah, the sound of the\nshofar has a strangely solemn effect, carrying back the mind of the\nhearer to the time when the priests bore their rams'-horn trumpets\nbefore the ark, and blew the same sacred blasts under the shadow of\nSinai.\n\nDr. Beigel has made a most singular discovery concerning the tones of\nthe shofar. If the reader will blow them on a flute in the exact order\nin which they stand, he will find that he is playing a portion of the\nnightingale's song. This remarkable fact has been communicated to the\nChief Rabbi and other Rabbim, who are unanimous in expressing their\nsatisfaction at it. We cannot, of course, venture to say whether the\nsacred tones were in the first instance copied from the notes of a\nsinging bird, but it is not unlikely that, whether consciously or not,\nthe mind of the ancient composer might have been influenced by tones\nwhich he had often heard, and which could be reproduced in the limited\ncompass of the ram's horn trumpet.\n\nThe old Rabbinical writers have a curious saying about the ram: \"The\nram in life has one tone, in death seven.\" This they explain in the\nfollowing way. When the animal is living the only sound which it can\nproduce is the bleat, but when it is dead it is made into musical\ninstruments.\n\n 1. Of the horns are made trumpets.\n\n 2. Of the leg-bones are made flutes.\n\n 3. Of the large intestines are made lute-strings.\n\n 4. Of the small intestines are made harp-strings.\n\n 5. Of the skin is made the drum-head.\n\n 6. Of the wool are made the pomegranates which hang between the\n golden bells of the High Priest's garment.\n\nThis latter sentence explains a passage in Exodus xxviii. 33, which is\nnot very easy of comprehension. When describing the ephod of the High\nPriest, the sacred writer proceeds to say, \"And beneath upon the hem\nof it thou shalt make pomegranates of blue, and of purple, and of\nscarlet, round about the hem thereof, and bells of gold between them\nround about.\" Both the material and the use of the blue and purple and\nscarlet pomegranates are here left uncertain, but this old Rabbinical\nsaying explains both. They were made of the dyed wool of the sheep,\nand their use was to prevent the bells from clashing harshly together,\nand to keep up a sort of gentle chime as the High Priest went about\nhis sacred duties.\n\nIt is very true that only six tones instead of seven are enumerated,\nbut we must not be too critical in dissecting an aphorism.\n\n\nWe now come to the important subject, the use of the Sheep in sacrifice.\nNo animal was used so frequently for this purpose as the Sheep, and\nin many passages of the Mosaic law are specified the precise age as\nwell as the sex of the Sheep which was to be sacrificed in certain\ncircumstances. Sometimes the Sheep was sacrificed as an offering of\nthanksgiving, sometimes as an expiation for sin, and sometimes as a\nredemption for some more valuable animal. The young male lamb was the\nusual sacrifice; and almost the only sacrifice for which a Sheep might\nnot be offered was that of the two goats on the great Day of\nAtonement. To mention all the passages in which the Sheep is ordered\nfor sacrifice would occupy too much of our space, and we will\ntherefore restrict ourselves to the one central rite of the Jewish\nnation, the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb, the precursor of the Lamb\nof God, who taketh away the sins of the world.\n\nWithout examining in full the various ceremonies of the Paschal\nsacrifice, we will glance over the salient points which distinguish it\nfrom any other sacrifice.\n\nThe lamb must be a male, which is selected and examined with the\nminutest care, that it may be free from all blemish, and must be of\nthe first year. It must be killed on the fourteenth of the month Abib\nas the sun is setting, and the blood must be sprinkled with hyssop. In\nthe first or Egyptian Passover the blood was sprinkled on the lintels\nand doorposts of the houses, but afterwards on the altar. It must be\nroasted with fire, and not boiled, after the usual custom in the East;\nnot a bone must be broken. It must be eaten by the household in haste,\nas if they were just starting on a journey, and if any of it should be\nleft, it must be consumed in the fire, and not eaten on the following\nday.\n\nSuch are the chief points in connexion with the Paschal rite, at once\na sacrifice and a feast. The original directions not being\nsufficiently minute to meet all the practical difficulties which might\nhinder the correct performance of the rite, a vast number of\ndirections are given by the Rabbinical writers. In order, for example,\nto guard against the destruction of any part of the animal by careless\ncooking over a fire, or the possible fracture of a bone by a sudden\njet of flame, the Paschal lamb was rather baked than roasted, being\nplaced in an earthen oven from which the ashes had been removed. In\norder to prevent it from being burned or blackened against the sides\nof the oven, (in which case it would be cooked with earthenware and\nnot with fire), it was transfixed with a wooden stake, made from the\npomegranate-tree, and a transverse spit was thrust through the\nshoulders. These spits were made of wood, because a metal spit would\nbecome heated in the oven, and would cause all the flesh which it\ntouched to be roasted with metal, and not with fire; and the wood of\nthe pomegranate was chosen, because that wood was supposed not to emit\nany sap when heated. If a drop of water had fallen on the flesh, the\nlaw would have been broken, as that part of the flesh would be\nconsidered as boiled, and not roasted.\n\nAs to the eating of unleavened bread and bitter herbs with the lamb,\nthe custom does not bear on the present subject. In shape the oven\nseems to have resembled a straw beehive, having an opening at the side\nby which the fuel could be removed and the lamb inserted.\n\nIt is most interesting to compare with the ancient Paschal sacrifice\nthe mode of conducting the Passover as still practised on Mount\nGerizim by the Samaritans, who still \"worship in this mountain,\" as\ntheir fathers had done. The Samaritans, a turbulent nation, or rather\nan aggregation of tribes who had adopted their own modification of the\nJewish religion, considered Mount Gerizim as the most sacred spot on\nthe earth, and made it a principle of their faith to worship there.\nThey hallowed the mountain with various traditions, some perhaps true,\nothers clearly erroneous. They said that on the summit of Mount\nGerizim, and not on the comparatively little hill of Moriah, Abraham's\nmarvellous faith was so fearfully tested. They even now point out the\nvery spot on which it took place--a small smoothed plot of ground on\nthe summit of the mountain, remarkable for the contrast which its\nlevel plateau presents to the rough, rugged sides of the mountain,\nbroken by clefts and strewn with great angular stones, as if a rocky\nmountain had been blown to pieces and the fragments showered on\nGerizim.\n\nOn Gerizim are the \"twelve stones\" of Joshua, placed by him in\ncommemoration of the passage of the Jordan. There are the great,\nmassive stones placed closely together in a row, and apparently\nforming part of the rocky mountain itself.\n\nOn Gerizim are the seven steps made by Adam when he was driven out of\nParadise, and in Gerizim is the cave in which the Tabernacle was\nbuilt. On Gerizim the Passover was celebrated in the time of Christ,\nand on Gerizim it is celebrated still. The Samaritans have often been\nprevented from doing so by the Moslems, and even so late as 1842 the\nMahometan Ulema threatened to murder the whole of the little\ncommunity, under two hundred in number, on the ground that they had no\nreligion.\n\nThe Samaritans believe themselves to be children of Ephraim and\nManasseh, and that their present priest is lineally descended from a\nbranch of the tribe of Levi, and have accordingly a great pride in\ntheir descent. They observe the ceremonial law with exceeding care,\nand, even through the many years of persecution to which they have\nbeen subjected, they have never failed to go thrice in the year to the\ntop of their holy mountain, repeating parts of the Law as they ascend.\nA great loss has lately fallen upon them. They had at one time a\npriesthood of the house of Aaron, but the family gradually dwindled\naway, and at last utterly perished.\n\nThe ceremony of the Passover has been described by several persons,\nsuch as the late Consul Rogers and the Dean of Westminster, the latter\nof whom has given a most striking and vivid account of the rite in his\n\"Lectures on the Jewish Church.\"\n\nThe place which is now employed in the celebration of this rite is a\nlevel spot about two hundred yards from the summit of the mountain, a\nplace which is apparently selected on account of its comparative quiet\nand seclusion. Dean Stanley thinks that in former times, when the\nSamaritans were the masters of the country, they celebrated the\nsacrifice on the sacred plateau on the very summit of the mountain, so\nthat the rite could be seen for a vast distance on every side. Now,\nhowever, the less conspicuous place is preferred. By the kindness of\nthe Palestine Exploration Society, I am enabled to present the reader\nwith a view of this sacred spot, taken from a photograph made an hour\nor two before the time of sacrifice. The rough, rugged character of\nthe mountain is shown by this illustration, though not so well as in\nseveral other photographs of Gerizim, in which the entire surface\nseems to be loosely covered with stones like those of which the low\nwall is built. Near the centre of the illustration may be seen a pile\nof sticks and the tops of two caldrons, on each of which a stone is\nlaid to keep the cover from being blown off by the wind. These sticks\nnearly fill a trench in which the caldrons are sunk, and their use\nwill be presently seen on reading Dean Stanley's narrative. In the far\ndistance are the plains of Samaria, and the long-drawn shadows of the\npriest and his nephew, and probable successor, show that the time of\nsacrifice is rapidly approaching.\n\n [Illustration: THE PLACE OF SACRIFICE.]\n\nOn the previous day the whole of the community had pitched their tents\non the mountain, and as the time of sunset approached the women\nretired to the tents, and all the males, except those who were unclean\naccording to the provisions of the Mosaic law, assembled near a long\ndeep trench that had been dug in the ground. The men are clothed in\nlong white garments, and the six young men who are selected as the\nactual sacrificers are dressed in white drawers and shirts. These\nyouths are trained to the duty, but whether they hold any sacred\noffice could not be ascertained.\n\nThen, according to the narrative of Dean Stanley, \"the priest,\nascending a large rough stone in front of the congregation, recited in\na loud chant or scream, in which the others joined, prayers or praises\nchiefly turning on the glories of Abraham and Isaac. Their attitude\nwas that of all Orientals in prayer; standing, occasionally\ndiversified by the stretching out of the hands, and more rarely by\nkneeling or crouching, with their knees wrapped in their clothes and\nbent to the ground, towards the Holy Place on the summit of Gerizim.\nThe priest recited his prayers by heart; the others had mostly books\nin Hebrew and Arabic.\n\n\"Presently, suddenly there appeared amongst the worshippers six sheep,\ndriven up by the side of the youths before mentioned. The unconscious\ninnocence with which they wandered to and fro amongst the bystanders,\nand the simplicity in aspect and manner of the young men who tended\nthem, more recalled a pastoral scene in Arcadia, or one of those\ninimitable patriarchal _tableaux_ represented in the Ammergau Mystery,\nthan a religious ceremonial.\n\n\"The sun, meanwhile, which had hitherto burnished up the Mediterranean\nin the distance, now sank very nearly to the farthest western ridge\noverhanging the plain of Sharon. The recitation became more vehement.\nThe priest turned about, facing his brethren, and the whole history of\nthe Exodus from the beginning of the plagues of Egypt was rapidly,\nalmost furiously, chanted. The sheep, still innocently playful, were\ndriven more closely together.\n\n\"The setting sun now touched the ridge. The youths burst into a wild\nmurmur of their own, drew forth their long bright knives, and\nbrandished them aloft. In a moment the sheep were thrown on their\nbacks, and the flashing knives rapidly drawn across their throats.\nThen a few convulsive but silent struggles--'as a sheep ... dumb ...\nthat openeth not his mouth,'--and the six forms lay lifeless on the\nground, the blood streaming from them; the one only Jewish sacrifice\nlingering in the world. In the blood the young men dipped their\nfingers, and a small spot was marked on the foreheads and noses of the\nchildren. A few years ago the red stain was placed on all. But this\nhad now dwindled away into the present practice, preserved, we were\ntold, as a relic or emblem of the whole. Then, as if in congratulation\nat the completion of the ceremony, they all kissed each other, in the\nOriental fashion, on each side of the head.\n\n\"The next process was that of the fleecing and roasting of the\nslaughtered animals, for which the ancient temple furnished such ample\nprovisions. Two holes on the mountain side had been dug; one at some\ndistance, of considerable depth, the other, close to the scene of the\nsacrifice, comparatively shallow. In this latter cavity, after a short\nprayer, a fire was kindled, out of the mass of dry heath, juniper, and\nbriers, such as furnished the materials for the conflagration in\nJotham's parable, delivered not far from this spot.\n\n\"Over the fire were placed two caldrons full of water. Whilst the\nwater boiled, the congregation again stood around, and (as if for\neconomy of time) continued the recitation of the Book of Exodus, and\nbitter herbs were handed round wrapped in a strip of unleavened\nbread--'with unleavened bread and bitter herbs shall they eat it.'\nThen was chanted another short prayer; after which the six youths\nagain appeared, poured the boiling water over the sheep, and plucked\noff their fleeces. The right forelegs of the sheep, with the entrails,\nwere thrown aside and burnt. The liver was carefully put back. Long\npoles were brought, on which the animals were spitted; near the bottom\nof each pole was a transverse peg or stick, to prevent the body from\nslipping off.\"\n\nThis cross-piece does not, however, penetrate the body, which in most\ncases scarcely touches it, so that there is little or no resemblance\nto a crucifixion. The writer lays especial stress on this point,\nbecause the early Christians saw in the transverse spit an emblem of\nthe cross. In the Jewish Passover this emblem would have been more\nappropriate, as in that ceremony the cross-piece was passed through\nthe shoulders, and the forefeet tied to it.\n\nThe Sheep being now prepared, they were carried to the oven, which on\nthis occasion was a deep, circular pit, in which a fire had been\npreviously kindled. Into this the victims were carefully lowered, the\nstakes on which they were impaled guarding their bodies from touching\nthe sides of the oven, and the cross-piece at the end preventing them\nfrom slipping off the stake to the bottom of the pit among the ashes.\nA hurdle was then laid on the mouth of the pit, and wet earth was\nheaped upon it so as to close it completely. The greater part of the\ncommunity then retired to rest. In about five hours, the Paschal moon\nbeing high in the heavens, announcement was made that the feast was\nabout to begin. Then, to resume Dean Stanley's narrative,\n\n\"Suddenly the covering of the hole was torn off, and up rose into the\nstill moonlit sky a vast column of smoke and steam; recalling, with a\nshock of surprise, that, even by an accidental coincidence, Reginald\nHeber should have so well caught this striking feature of so remote\nand unknown a ritual:\n\n 'Smokes on Gerizim's mount Samaria's sacrifice.'\n\n\"Out of the pit were dragged successively the six sheep, on their long\nspits, black from the oven. The outlines of their heads, their ears,\ntheir legs, were still visible--'his head, with his legs, and with the\ninward parts thereof.' They were hoisted aloft, and then thrown on\nlarge square brown mats, previously prepared for their reception, on\nwhich we were carefully prevented from treading, as also from touching\neven the extremities of the spit.\n\n\"The bodies thus wrapped in the mats were hurried down to the trench\nwhere the sacrifice had taken place, and laid out upon them in a line\nbetween two files of the Samaritans. Those who had before been dressed\nin white robes still retained them, with the addition now of shoes on\ntheir feet and staves in their hands, and ropes round their\nwaists--'thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on\nyour feet, your staff in your hand.' The recitation of prayers or of\nthe Pentateuch recommenced, and continued till it suddenly terminated\nin their all sitting down on their haunches, after the Arab fashion at\nmeals, and beginning to eat. This, too, is a deviation from the\npractice of only a few years since, when they retained the Mosaic\nritual of standing whilst they ate. The actual feast was conducted in\nrapid silence, as of men in hunger, as no doubt most of them were, and\nso as soon to consume every portion of the blackened masses, which\nthey tore away piecemeal with their fingers--'ye shall eat in haste.'\nThere was a general merriment, as of a hearty and welcome meal.\n\n\"In ten minutes all was gone but a few remnants. To the priest and to\nthe women, who, all but two (probably his two wives), remained in the\ntents, separate morsels were carried round. The remnants were gathered\ninto the mats, and put on a wooden grate, or hurdle, over the hole\nwhere the water had been originally boiled; the fire was again lit,\nand a huge bonfire was kindled. By its blaze, and by candles lighted\nfor the purpose, the ground was searched in every direction, as for\nthe consecrated particles of sacramental elements; and these fragments\nof flesh and bone were thrown upon the burning mass--'ye shall let\nnothing remain until the morning; and that which remaineth until the\nmorning ye shall burn with fire;' 'there shall not anything of the\nflesh which thou sacrificest the first day at even remain all night\nuntil the morning;' 'thou shalt not carry forth aught of the flesh\nabroad out of the house.' The flames blazed up once more, and then\ngradually sank away.\n\n\"Perhaps in another century the fire on Mount Gerizim will be the only\nrelic left of this most interesting and ancient rite.\"\n\n\n\n\nTHE CHAMOIS.\n\n The Zemer or Chamois only once mentioned in the\n Bible--Signification of the word Zemer--Probability that the\n Zemer is the Aoudad--Appearance of the Aoudad--Its strength and\n activity--Fierce temper of the adult male--Horns of the\n Aoudad--Their probable use as musical instruments--Habits of the\n Aoudad--The Mouflon probably classed with the Aoudad under the\n name of Zemer--Appearance and habits of the Mouflon.\n\n\nAmong the animals which may be used for food is mentioned one which in\nour version is rendered Chamois. See Deut. xiv. 5, a passage which has\nseveral times been quoted.\n\nIt is evident to any one acquainted with zoology that, whatever may be\nthe Hebrew word, \"Chamois\" cannot be the correct rendering, inasmuch\nas the real Chamois does not inhabit Palestine, nor are there any\nproofs that it ever did so. We must, therefore, look for some other\nanimal.\n\nThen, the Hebrew word, which only occurs once in the Bible, is Zamar,\nor Zemer, _i.e._ the leaper, and therefore an animal which is\nconspicuous for its agility. Zoologists have now agreed in the opinion\nthat the Zamer of Deuteronomy is the handsome wild sheep which we know\nunder the name of Aoudad (_Ammotragus Tragelaphus_). This splendid\nsheep is known by various names. It is the Jaela of some authors, and\nthe Bearded Sheep of others. It is also called the Fichtall, or\nLerwea; and the French zoologists describe it under the name of\n_Mouflon \u00e0 manchettes_, in allusion to the fringe of long hair that\nornaments the fore limbs.\n\nThe Aoudad is a large and powerful animal, exceedingly active, and has\nthe habits of the goat rather than of the sheep, on which account it\nis reckoned among the goats by the Arabs of the present day, and\ndoubtless was similarly classed by the ancient inhabitants of\nPalestine. The height of the adult Aoudad is about three feet, and its\ngeneral colour is pale dun, relieved by the dark masses of long hair\nthat fall from the neck and the tufts of similar hair which decorate\nthe knees of the male. The female is also bearded and tufted, but the\nhair, which in the male looks like the mane of the lion, in the female\nis but slightly developed.\n\nIt is so powerful and active an animal, that an adult male which lived\nfor some time in the Zoological Gardens was much dreaded by the\nkeepers, not even the man who fed it liking to enter the enclosure if\nhe could help himself. The animal was given to making unexpected\ncharges, and would do so with astonishing quickness, springing round\nand leaping at the object of his hate with tremendous force, and with\nsuch rapidity that even the experienced keeper, who knew all the ways\nof the animals under his charge, had often some difficulty in slipping\nbehind the door, against which the horns of the Aoudad would clatter\nas if they would break the door to pieces. So fond was he of attacking\nsomething that he would often butt repeatedly at the wooden side of\nthe shed, hurling himself against it with eager fury.\n\nThe horns of the Aoudad are about two feet in length, and are of\nconsiderable diameter. They curve boldly and gracefully backwards,\ntheir points diverging considerably from each other, so that when the\nanimal throws its head up, the points of the horns come on either\nside of the back. This divergence of the horns has another object.\nThey cover a considerable space, so that when the animal makes its\ncharge the object of its anger has much more difficulty in escaping\nthe blow than if the horns were closer together.\n\n [Illustration: THE AOUDAD CHASED.\n\n \"_These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat\n ... and the chamois._\"--DEUT. xiv. 4, 5.]\n\nWhether these horns were used as musical instruments is doubtful,\nsimply because we are not absolutely sure that the Zamar and the\nAoudad are identical, however great may be the probability. But\ninasmuch as the horn-trumpets were evidently of various sizes, it is\ncertain that the Jewish musicians would never have neglected to take\nadvantage of such magnificent materials as they would obtain from the\nhorns of this animal. Perhaps the Chaldaic \"keren\" may have been the\nhorn of the Aoudad, or of the animal which will next be mentioned.\n\nThe Aoudad is wonderfully active, and even the young ones bound to an\nastonishing height. I have seen the marks of their hoofs eight feet\nfrom the ground.\n\nIn its wild state the Aoudad lives in little flocks or herds, and\nprefers the high and rocky ground, over which it leaps with a\nsure-footed agility equal to that of the Chamois itself. These flocks\nare chased by hunters, who try to get it upon the lowest and least\nbroken ground, where it is at a disadvantage, and then run it down\nwith their horses, as seen in the illustration on page 187.\n\nThe Aoudad was formerly plentiful in Egypt, and even now is found\nalong the Atlas mountain-range. It is seen on the Egyptian monuments,\nand, owing to its evident profusion, we have every reason to\nconjecture that it was one of those animals which were specially\nindicated as chewing the cud and cleaving the hoof.\n\n\nPERHAPS THE MOUFLON (_Caprovis Musimon_) may be the animal which is\nmeant by the Hebrew word Zamar, and it is not unlikely that both\nanimals may have been included in one name.\n\nThis animal, which is nearly allied to the Aoudad, is also very\ngoatlike in general aspect. It is indeed to this resemblance that the\nname Caprovis, or goat-sheep, has been given to it. The name\nAmmotragus, which, as mentioned above, belongs to the Aoudad, has a\nsimilar signification.\n\nThe horns of the Mouflon belong only to the male animal, and are of\nenormous size, so that if trumpets of deep tone and great power were\nneeded, they could be obtained from the horns of this animal. Those of\nthe Aoudad are very large, and would be well adapted for the same\npurpose, but they would not furnish such instruments as the horns of\nthe Mouflon, which are so large that they seem almost unwieldy for an\nanimal of twice the Mouflon's size, and give visible proofs of the\nstrength and agility of an animal which can carry them so lightly and\nleap about under their weight so easily as does the Mouflon.\n\nAt the present time the Mouflon is only to be found in Cyprus,\nSardinia, and Corsica, but formerly it was known to inhabit many\nother parts of the earth, and was almost certainly one of the many\nanimals which then haunted the Lebanon, but which have in later days\nbeen extirpated.\n\n\n\n\nTHE GOAT.\n\n Value of the Goat--Its use in furnishing food--The male kid the\n usual animal of slaughter--Excellence of the flesh and deception\n of Isaac--Milk of the Goat--An Oriental milking scene--The hair\n of the goat, and the uses to which it is put--The Goat's skin\n used for leather--The \"bottle\" of Scripture--Mode of making and\n repairing the bottles--Ruse of the Gibeonites--The \"bottle in\n the smoke\"--The sacks and the kneading troughs--The Goat as used\n for sacrifice--General habits of the Goat--Separation of the\n Goats from the sheep--Performing Goats--Different breeds of\n Goats in Palestine.\n\n\nWhether considered in reference to food, to clothing, or to sacrifice,\nthe GOAT was scarcely a less important animal than the sheep. It was\nespecially valuable in such a country as Palestine, in which the soil\nand the climate vary so much according to the locality. Upon the large\nfertile plains the sheep are bred in vast flocks, the rich and\nsucculent grass being exactly to their taste; while in the hilly and\ncraggy districts the Goats abound, and delight in browsing upon the\nscanty herbage that grows upon the mountain-side.\n\nFor food the Goat was even more extensively used than the sheep. The\nadult male was, of course, not eaten, being very tough, and having an\nodour which would repel any but an actually starving man. Neither were\nthe females generally eaten, as they were needed for the future\nincrease of the flocks. The young male kid formed the principal\nmaterial of a feast, and as soon as a stranger claimed the hospitality\nof a man in good circumstances, the first thing that was done was to\ntake a young male kid and dress it for him.\n\nFor example, when the angel visited Gideon in the guise of a stranger,\nGideon \"went in and made ready a kid, and unleavened cakes of an ephah\nof flour,\" and brought them to his guest (Judges vi. 19). And when\nIsaac was on his death-bed, and asked Esau to take his bow and arrows\nand hunt for \"venison,\" which was probably the flesh of one of the\nantelopes which have already been mentioned, a ready substitute was\nfound in the two kids, from whose flesh Rebekah made the dish for\nwhich he longed. The imposition might easily pass without detection,\nbecause the flesh of the kid is peculiarly tender, and can scarcely be\ndistinguished from lamb, even when simply roasted. Isaac, therefore,\nwith his senses dulled by his great age, was the less likely to\ndiscover the imposture, when the flesh of the kids was stewed into\n\"savoury meat such as he loved.\"\n\nA curious illustration of the prevalence of kid's flesh as food is\ngiven in the parable of the prodigal son, for whom his father had\nkilled the fatted calf. \"And he answering said to his father, Lo,\nthese many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time\nthy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make\nmerry with my friends\" (Luke xv. 29). The force of the reproval cannot\nbe properly understood unless we are acquainted with the customs of\nthe East. The kid was the least valuable animal that could have been\ngiven, less valuable than a lamb, and infinitely inferior to the\nfatted calf, which was kept in wealthy households for some feast of\nmore than ordinary magnificence.\n\nThe kid was cooked exactly in the same manner as the sheep, namely, by\ncutting to pieces and stewing in a caldron, the meat and broth being\nserved separately. See, for example, the case of Gideon, to whom a\nreference has already been made. When he brought the banquet to his\nguest, \"the flesh he put in a basket, and he put the broth in a pot,\nand brought it out unto him under the oak, and presented it. And the\nangel of God said unto him, Take the flesh and the unleavened cakes,\nand lay them upon this rock, and pour out the broth.\"\n\nThe same custom exists at the present day. When an Arab chief receives\na guest, a kid is immediately killed and given to the women to be\ncooked in a separate tent, and the guest is pressed to stay until it\nis ready, in the very words used by Gideon three thousand years ago.\n\"Depart not hence, I pray thee, until I come unto thee, and bring\nforth my present, and set it before thee.\" And the angelic guest\nanswered him just as a modern Arab traveller would answer his host, \"I\nwill tarry until thou come again.\" For the refusal of proffered\nhospitality would be and still is considered to be, either a studied\ninsult, or a proof of bad manners, and no one with any claims to\nbreeding would commit such an action without urgent cause and much\napology.\n\nLike the sheep, the Goat is extremely valuable as a milk-producer, and\nat the present day the milk of the Goat is used as largely as that of\nthe sheep. \"At Rasheiya, under Mount Hermon,\" writes Mr. Tristram, \"we\nsaw some hundreds of goats gathering for the night in the wide open\nmarket-place beneath the castle. It was no easy matter to thread our\nway among them, as they had no idea of moving for such belated\nintruders on their rest. All the she-goats of the neighbouring hills\nare driven in every evening, and remain for their morning's milking,\nafter which they set forth on their day's excursion.\n\n\"Each house possesses several, and all know their owners. The evening\nmilking is a picturesque scene. Every street and open space is filled\nwith the goats; and women, boys, and girls are everywhere milking with\ntheir small pewter pots, while the goats are anxiously awaiting their\nturn, or lying down to chew the cud as soon as it is over. As no kids\nor he-goats are admitted, the scene is very orderly, and there is none\nof the deafening bleating which usually characterises large flocks.\n\n\"These mountain goats are a solemn set, and by the gravity of their\ndemeanour excite a suspicion that they have had no youth, and never\nwere kids. They need no herdsman to bring them home in the evening,\nfor, fully sensible of the danger of remaining unprotected, they hurry\nhomewards of their own accord as soon as the sun begins to decline.\"\n\n\nLike the wool of the sheep, the hair of the Goat is used for the\nmanufacture of clothing; and, as is the case with wool, its quality\ndiffers according to the particular breed of the animal, which assumes\nalmost as many varieties as the sheep or the dog. The hair of some\nvarieties is thick and rough, and can only be made into coarse cloths,\nwhile others, of which the mohair Goat and Cashmere Goat are familiar\nexamples, furnish a staple of surpassing delicacy and fineness. It is\nmost likely that the covering and curtains of the Tabernacle mentioned\nin Exod. xxvi. 7 were of the latter kind, as otherwise they would have\nbeen out of character with the fine linen, and blue and scarlet, their\ngolden clasps, and the profuse magnificence which distinguished every\npart of the sacred building. Moreover, the hair of the Goat is classed\namong the costly offerings which were made when the Tabernacle was\nbuilt. \"And they came forth, men and women, as many as were willing\nhearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets,\nall jewels of gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of\ngold unto the Lord. And every man, with whom was found blue, and\npurple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, and red skins of\nrams, and badgers' skins, brought them\" to be used in the structure of\nthat wonderful building, in which nothing might be used except the\nfinest and costliest that could be procured.\n\nOne of the principal uses to which the goat-skin was applied was the\nmanufacture of leather, for which purpose it is still used, and is\nconsidered far better than that of the sheep. Perhaps the most common\nform in which this leather is used is the well-known water-vessel, or\n\"bottle\" of the Bible.\n\nThese so-called bottles are made from the entire skin of the animal,\nwhich is prepared in slightly different methods according to the\nlocality in which the manufacture is carried on. In Palestine they are\nsoaked for some little time in the tanning mixture, and are then\nfilled with water, after the seams have been pitched. In this state\nthey are kept for some time, and are kept exposed to the sun, covered\nentirely with the tanning fluid, and filled up with water to supply\nthe loss caused by evaporation and leakage.\n\nThe hair is allowed to remain on the skins, because it acts as a\npreservative against the rough usage to which they are subject at the\nhard hands of the water-carriers. By degrees the hairy covering wears\noff, first in patches, and then over the entire surface, so that a new\nbottle can be recognised at a glance, and any one who wished to sell\nan old bottle at the price of a new one would be at once detected.\n\nVessels made in this rude manner are absolutely necessary in the\ncountries wherein they are used. Wooden or metal vessels would be too\nheavy, and, besides, the slight though constant evaporation that\nalways takes place through the pores of the leather keeps down the\ntemperature of the water, even under a burning sun, the slight loss\nwhich is caused by the porousness of the skin being more than\ncounterbalanced by the coolness of the water. It is true that the\ngoat-skin communicates to the liquid a flavour far from pleasant, but\nin those countries the quality of the water is of little consequence,\nprovided that it is plentiful in quantity, and tolerably cool.\n\nEven in our own country, leathern drinking-cups are sometimes used,\nand all who have taken any interest in antiquarian manners are\nfamiliar with the \"leather bottle\" and the \"black-jack,\" the former\nonly surviving in museums and as signs to public-houses, though the\nlatter has within the memory of the present generation been in common\nuse. Leathern bottles are still used in the Turkish army, and I have\nin my collection one of these water-bottles, which is practically the\nsame article as the \"bottle\" of Scripture, though it is of\ncomparatively small size, and is made with some attempt at elegance of\nform.\n\nIn all parts of the world where the skin is used for this purpose the\nmode of manufacture is practically identical. An account of the art of\npreparing the goat-skin as practised in Abyssinia is given by Mr. C.\nJohnston, in his \"Travels in Southern Abyssinia:\"--\n\n\"To be of any value it must be taken off uncut, except around the\nneck, and in those situations necessary to enable the butchers to draw\nthe legs out of the skin; also, of course, where the first incision is\nmade to commence the process, and which is a circular cut carried\naround both haunches, not many inches from and having the tail for a\ncentre. The hide is then stripped over the thighs, and two smaller\nincisions being made round the middle joint of the hind-legs enable\nthem to be drawn out.\n\n\"A stick is now placed to extend these extremities, and by this, for\nthe convenience of the operators, the whole carcase is suspended from\nthe branch of a tree, and, by some easy pulls around the body, the\nskin is gradually withdrawn over the fore-legs, which are incised\naround the knees, to admit of their being taken out; after which, the\nhead being removed, the whole business concludes by the skin being\npulled inside out over the decollated neck. One of the parties now\ntakes a rough stone and well rubs the inside surface, to divest it of\na few fibres of the subcutaneous muscle which are inserted into the\nskin, and after this operation it is laid aside until the next day;\nthe more interesting business of attending to the meat calling for\nimmediate attention.\n\n\"These entire skins are afterwards made into sacks by the apertures\naround the neck and legs being secured by a double fold of the skin\nbeing sewed upon each other, by means of a slender but very tough\nthong. These small seams are rendered quite air-tight, and the larger\norifice around the haunches being gathered together by the hands, the\nyet raw skin is distended with air; and the orifice being then tied\nup, the swollen bag is left in that state for a few days, until slight\nputrefaction has commenced, when the application of the rough stone\nsoon divests its surface of the hair. After this has been effected, a\ndeal of labour, during at least one day, is required to soften the\ndistended skin by beating it with heavy sticks, or trampling upon it\nfor hours together, the labourer supporting himself by clinging to the\nbough of a tree overhead, or holding on by the wall of the house.\n\n\"In this manner, whilst the skin is drying, it is prevented from\ngetting stiff, and, still further to secure it from this evil\ncondition, it is frequently rubbed with small quantities of butter.\nWhen it is supposed that there is no chance of the skin becoming hard\nand easily broken, the orifice is opened, the air escapes, and a very\nsoft, flaccid leather bag is produced, but which, for several days\nafter, affords an amusement to the owner, when otherwise unemployed,\nby well rubbing it all over with his hands.\"\n\nThe reader will see that the two processes are practically identical,\nthe chief difference being that in one country the skins are distended\nwith water and in the other with air.\n\nAs these bottles are rather apt to be damaged by the thorns, branches,\nrocks, and similar objects with which they come in contact, and are\nmuch too valuable to be thrown away as useless, their owners have\ndiscovered methods of patching and repairing them, which enable them\nto be used for some time longer. Patches of considerable size are\nsometimes inserted, if the rent should be of importance, while the\nwound caused by a thorn is mended by a simple and efficacious\nexpedient. The skin is first emptied, and a round flat piece of wood,\nor even a stone of suitable shape, is put into it. The skin is then\nheld with the wounded part downwards, and the stone shaken about until\nit comes exactly upon the hole. It is then grasped, the still wet hide\ngathered tightly under it, so as to pucker up the skin, and a ligature\nis tied firmly round it. Perhaps some of my readers may have\npractised the same method of mending a punctured football.\n\nAllusion to this mode of mending the skin bottles is made in Josh. ix.\n4, 13. The Gibeonites \"did work wilily, and went and made as if they\nhad been ambassadors, and took old sacks upon their asses, and wine\nbottles, old, and rent, and bound up ... and said ... these bottles of\nwine, which we filled, were new; and, behold, they be rent.\"\n\nIf these skin bottles be allowed to become dry, as is sometimes the\ncase when they are hung up in the smoky tents, they shrivel up, and\nbecome rotten and weak, and are no longer enabled to bear the pressure\ncaused by the fermentation of new wine. So, in Ps. cxix. 81-83: \"My\nsoul fainteth for Thy salvation: but I hope in Thy word.\n\n\"Mine eyes fail for Thy word, saying, When wilt Thou comfort me?\n\n\"For I am become like a bottle in the smoke; yet do I not forget Thy\nstatutes.\"\n\nHow forcible does not this image become, when we realize the early\nlife of the shepherd poet, his dwelling in tents wherein are no\nwindows nor chimneys, and in which the smoke rolls to and fro until it\nsettles in the form of soot upon the leathern bottles and other rude\narticles of furniture that are hung from the poles!\n\nIn the New Testament there is a well-known allusion to the weakness of\nold bottles: \"Neither do men put new wine into old bottles, or the\nbottles break and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish; but\nthey put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.\" It would\nbe impossible to understand the meaning of this passage unless we knew\nthat the \"bottles\" in question were not vessels of glass or\nearthenware, but merely the partly-tanned skins of goats.\n\nAnother allusion to the use of the goat-skin is made in that part of\nthe Book of Joshua which has already been mentioned. If the reader\nwill refer to Josh. ix. 4, he will see that the Gibeonites took with\nthem not only old bottles, but old sacks. Now, these sacks bore no\nresemblance to the hempen bags with which we are so familiar, but were\nnothing more than the same goat-skins that were employed in the\nmanufacture of bottles, but with the opening at the neck left open.\nThey were, in fact, skin-bottles for holding solids instead of\nliquids. The sacks which Joseph's brethren took with them, and in the\nmouths of which they found their money, were simply goat-skin bags,\nmade as described.\n\nYet another use for the goat-skin. It is almost certain that the\n\"kneading-troughs\" of the ancient Israelites were simply circular\npieces of goat-skin, which could be laid on the ground when wanted,\nand rolled up and carried away when out of use. Thus, the fact that\n\"the people took their dough before it was leavened, their\nkneading-troughs being bound up in their clothing upon their\nshoulders,\" need cause no surprise.\n\nNothing could be more in accordance with probability. The women were\nall hard at work, preparing the bread for the expected journey, when\nthe terrified Pharaoh \"called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said,\nRise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the\nchildren of Israel, and go, serve the Lord, as ye have said.... And\nthe Egyptians were urgent upon the people that they might send them\nout of the land in haste; for they said, We be all dead men.\"\n\nSo the women, being disturbed at their work, and being driven out of\nthe country before they had leavened, much less baked, their bread,\nhad no alternative but to roll up the dough in the leathern\n\"kneading-troughs,\" tie them up in a bundle with their spare clothing,\nand carry them on their shoulders; whereas, if we connect the\nkneading-troughs with the large heavy wooden implements used in this\ncountry, we shall form an entirely erroneous idea of the proceeding.\nAs soon as they came to their first halting-place at Succoth, they\ntook the leathern kneading-troughs out of their clothes, unrolled\nthem, took the dough which had not even been leavened, so unexpectedly\nhad the order for marching arrived, made it into flat cakes, and baked\nthem as they best could. The same kind of \"kneading-trough\" is still\nin use in many parts of the world.\n\nStone as well as earthenware jars were also used by the inhabitants of\nancient Palestine; but they were only employed for the storage of wine\nin houses, whereas the bottles that were used in carrying wine from\none place to another were invariably made of leather. Water also was\nstored in stone or earthenware jars. See, for example, John ii. 6:\n\"And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of\nthe purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.\"\nWhereas, when it was carried about, it was poured into bottles made of\nskin. Such was probably the \"bottle of water\" that Abraham put on\nHagar's shoulder, when she was driven away by the jealousy of Sarah.\nSuch was the \"bottle of wine\" that Hannah brought as her offering when\nshe dedicated Samuel to the service of God; and such was the \"bottle\nof milk\" that Jael opened for Sisera when he came to her tent. Even\noil is carried in these bottles, which are certainly better adapted to\nthe backs of mules, which are the usual beasts of burden, than they\nwould be if they were made of glass or earthenware.\n\nThe Rabbinical writers have much to say upon the Goat; but as the\ngreater part of their observations and directions are without any\ngeneral interest, only a few will be selected from them.\n\nKnowing the great strength of the Goat of their own days, they\nexaggerate the power of those which belonged to the ancients. Job's\nhe-goats, for example, are said to have been so strong and fierce that\nthey could conquer wolves, while some were so powerful that they\ncarried bears upon their horns. They also were accustomed to climb\nrocks, dig up roots, and bring them down in their mouths.\n\nThe milk of the white Goat is useful medicinally for affections of the\nlungs, and the spleen of a female kid for diseases of the spleen. But\nif Goats are allowed to drink of the water in which blacksmiths cool\ntheir iron, the spleen gradually withers away, and at last disappears\naltogether. If the owner should desire to fatten a she-goat, he ought\nto tie up the udders so tightly that the milk cannot come into them,\nand the nourishment is therefore converted into fat instead of milk.\nAlso, he should take care to keep his Goats away from the place where\nbread is being made, as they are very fond of the unbaked dough, and\nalways die if they eat it.\n\n\nIn sacrifices, the Goat was in nearly as much requisition as the lamb,\nand in one--namely, that which was celebrated on the Great Day of\nAtonement--the Goat was specially mentioned as the only animal which\ncould be sacrificed. The reader will, perhaps, remember that for this\npeculiar sacrifice two Goats were required, on which two lots were\ncast, one for the Lord, _i.e._ with the word \"Jehovah\" upon it, and\nthe other for the scapegoat, _i.e._ inscribed with the word \"Azazel.\"\nThe latter term is derived from two Hebrew words, the former being\n\"Az,\" which is the general name for the Goat, and the second \"azel,\"\nsignifying \"he departed.\" The former, which belonged to Jehovah, was\nsacrificed, and its blood sprinkled upon the mercy-seat and the altar\nof incense; and the Goat Azazel was led away into the wilderness,\nbearing upon its head the sins of the people, and there let loose.\n\n\nThese being the uses of the Goat, it may naturally be imagined that\nthe animal is one of extreme importance, and that it is watched as\ncarefully by its owners as the sheep. Indeed, both sheep and Goats\nbelong to the same master, and are tended by the same shepherd, who\nexercises the same sway over them that he does over the sheep.\n\nThey are, however, erratic animals, and, although they will follow the\nshepherd wherever he may lead them, they will not mix with the sheep.\nThe latter will walk in a compact flock along the valley, the shepherd\nleading the way, and the sheep following him, led in their turn by the\nsound of the bell tied round the neck of the master-ram of the flock.\nThe Goats, however, will not submit to walk in so quiet a manner, but\nprefer to climb along the sides of the rocks that skirt the valleys,\nskipping and jumping as they go, and seeming to take delight in\ngetting themselves into dangerous places, where a man could not\nventure to set his foot.\n\nIn the evening, when the shepherds call their flocks to repose, they\noften make use of the caverns which exist at some height in the\nprecipitous side of the hills, as being safe strongholds, where the\njackal and the hy\u00e6na will not venture to attack them. When such is the\ncase, the shepherds take their station by the mouth of the cave, and\nassist the sheep as they come sedately up the narrow path that leads\nto the cavern. The Goats, however, need no assistance, but come\nscrambling along by paths where no foot but a Goat's could tread,\nmostly descending from a considerable height above the cave, and, as\nif in exultation at their superior agility, jumping over the backs of\nthe sheep as they slowly file into the accustomed fold.\n\nFriendly as they are, the Goats and sheep never mingle together. There\nmay be large flocks of them feeding in the same pasturage, but the\nGoats always take the highest spots on which verdure grows, while the\nsheep graze quietly below. Goats are specially fond of the tender\nshoots of trees, which they find in plenty upon the mountain side;\nand, according to Mr. Tristram, by their continual browsing, they have\nextirpated many species of trees which were once common on the hills\nof Palestine, and which now can only be found in Lebanon on the east\nof the Jordan.\n\n [Illustration: GOATS ON THE MARCH.\n\n \"_As a shepherd divideth the sheep from the goats._\"--MATT. xxv. 32.]\n\nEven when folded together in the same enclosure, the Goats never mix\nwith the sheep, but gather together by themselves, and they\ninstinctively take the same order when assembled round the wells at\nmid-day.\n\nThis instinctive separation of the sheep and the goats naturally\nrecalls to our minds the well-known saying of our Lord that \"before\nHim shall be gathered all nations, and He shall separate them one from\nanother, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and He shall\nset the sheep on His right hand, and the goats on His left.\"\n\nThe image thus used was one that was familiar to all the hearers, who\nwere accustomed daily to see the herds of sheep and Goats under one\nshepherd, yet totally distinct from each other. At feeding-time the\nGoats will be browsing in long lines on the mountain sides, while the\nsheep are grazing in the plain or valley; at mid-day, when the flocks\nare gathered round the wells to await the rolling away of the stone\nthat guards the water, the Goats assemble on one side and the sheep on\nthe other. And at night, when they are all gathered into one fold by\none shepherd, they are still separated from each other. The same image\nis employed by the prophet Ezekiel: \"As for you, O my flock, thus said\nthe Lord God, Behold I judge between cattle and cattle, between rams\nand the he-goats.\"\n\nGenerally, the leading Goat was distinguished by a bell as well as the\nleading sheep, and in reference to this custom there was an old\nproverb, \"If the shepherd takes the lead, he blinds the bell-goat,\"\nwhile another proverb is based upon the inferior docility of the\nanimal--\"If the shepherd be lame, the Goats will run away.\"\n\nYet the Goat can be tamed very effectively, and can even be\ntaught to perform many tricks. \"We saw just below us, on the\nrudely-constructed 'parade,' a crowd of men and children, surrounding\na fantastically-dressed man exhibiting a Goat, which had been tutored to\nperform some cunning trick. It stood with its four feet close together\non the top of a very long pole, and allowed the man to lift it up and\ncarry it round and round within the circle; then the Goat was perched\non four sticks, and again carried about. A little band of music-pipes,\ndrums, and tambourines--called together the people from all parts of\nthe town to witness this performance.\n\n\"The Goat danced and balanced himself obediently and perfectly, in\nvery unnatural-looking positions, as if thoroughly understanding the\nwords and commands of his master. The men who watched the actions of\nthe Goat looked as grave and serious as if they were attending a\nphilosophical or scientific lecture.\" (\"Domestic Life in Palestine,\"\nby Miss Rogers.)\n\nAnother feat is a favourite with the proprietors of trained Goats. The\nman takes a stool and plants it carefully on the ground, so as to be\nperfectly level, and then orders the Goat to stand upon it. A piece of\nwood about six inches in length, and shaped something like a dice-box,\nis then placed on the stool, and the Goat manages to stand on it, all\nhis sharp, hard hoofs being pressed closely together on the tiny\nsurface. The man then takes another piece of wood and holds it to the\nGoat's feet. The animal gently removes first one foot and then\nanother, and, by careful shifting of the feet, enables its master to\nplace the second piece of wood on the first. Successive additions are\nmade, until at the last the Goat is perched on the topmost of some\nnine or ten pieces of wood balanced on each other, the whole looking\nlike a stout reed marked off with joints.\n\nThe stately steps and bold bearing of the old he-goat is mentioned in\nthe Proverbs: \"There be three things which go well, yea, four are\ncomely in going:\n\n\"A lion, which is strongest among beasts, and turneth not away for\nany;\n\n\"A greyhound; an he-goat also; and a king, against whom there is no\nrising up.\" (Prov. xxx. 29-31.) The word which is here rendered as\nhe-goat signifies literally the \"Butter,\" and is given to the animal\non account of the mode in which it uses its formidable horns. The word\nis not common in the Bible, but it is used even at the present day\namong the Arabs.\n\nSeveral herds of goats exist in Palestine, the most valuable of which\nis the Mohair Goat, and the most common the Syrian Goat. These,\nhowever dissimilar they may be in appearance, are only varieties of\nthe ordinary domestic animal, the former being produced artificially\nby carefully selecting those specimens for breeding which have the\nlongest and finest hair. It was from the hair of this breed that the\ncostly fabrics used in the Tabernacle were woven, and it is probably\nto this breed that reference is made in Solomon's Song, iv. 1, 2:\n\"Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold, thou art fair; thou hast\ndoves' eyes within thy locks: thy hair is as a flock of goats, that\nappear from Mount Gilead.\n\n\"Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep that are even shorn, which came\nup from the washing.\" In this passage the careful reader will also\nnote another reference to the habits of the Goats and sheep, the hair\nbeing compared to the dark-haired Goats that wander on the tops of the\nhills, while the teeth are compared to sheep that are ranged in\nregular order below. The Mohair Goat is known scientifically as _Capra\nAngorensis_. The same image is used again in chap. vi. 5.\n\nThe second breed is that which is commonest throughout the country. It\nis known by the name of the Syrian Goat, and is remarkable for the\nenormous length of its ears, which sometimes exceed a foot from root\nto tip. This variety has been described as a separate species under\nthe name of _Capra Mambrica_, or _C. Syriaca_, but, like the Mohair\nGoat, and twenty-three other so-called species, is simply a variety of\nthe common Goat, _Hircus \u00e6gragus_.\n\nReference is made to the long ears of the Syrian Goat in Amos iii. 12:\n\"Thus saith the Lord: As the shepherd taketh out of the mouth of the\nlion two legs, or a piece of an ear; so shall the children of Israel\nbe taken out that dwell in Samaria.\" Such a scene, which was familiar\nto Amos, the shepherd as well as the prophet, is represented in the\nillustration. In the foreground is the goat on which the lion has\nsprung, and from which one of the long ears has been torn away. Its\ncompanions are gathering round it in sympathy, while its kid is trying\nto discover the cause of its mother's uneasiness. In the background is\na group of armed shepherds, standing round the lion which they have\njust killed, while one of them is holding up the torn ear which he has\ntaken out of the lion's mouth.\n\n [Illustration: THE GOAT.\n\n \"As the shepherd taketh out of the mouth of the lion a piece of an\n ear.\"--AMOS iii. 12.]\n\n\n\n\nTHE WILD GOAT.\n\n The Azelim or Wild Goats of Scripture identical with the Beden\n or Arabian Ibex--Different names of the Beden--Its appearance\n and general habits--En-gedi, or Goats' Fountain--The Beden\n formerly very plentiful in Palestine, and now tolerably\n common--Its agility--Difficulty of catching or killing it--How\n the young are captured--Flesh of the Beden--Use of the horns at\n the present day--The Ako of Deuteronomy.\n\n\nIn three passages of the Old Testament occurs a word, \"Azelim,\" which\nis variously translated in our Authorized Version.\n\nIt is first seen in 1 Sam. xxiv. 2, in which it is rendered as \"Wild\nGoats.\" \"It was told Saul, saying, Behold, David is in the wilderness\nof En-gedi [_i.e._ the Fountain of the Goat]. Then Saul took three\nthousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went to seek David and his\nmen upon the rocks of the wild goats (_azelim_).\" The same word occurs\nin Job xxxix. 1: \"Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of the\nrock bring forth?\" It is also found in Ps. civ. 18: \"The high hills\nare a refuge for the wild goats.\" In all these passages it is rendered\nas \"wild goats.\" But, in Prov. v. 19, it is translated as roe:\n\"Rejoice with the wife of thy youth. Let her be as the loving hind and\npleasant roe (_azelah_).\" The Jewish Bible follows the same diverse\nrenderings.\n\nWe now have to discover the animal which was signified by the word\nAzel. According to its etymology, it is the Climber, just as the adult\nhe-goat is called the Butter.\n\nThat it was a climbing animal is evident from its name, and that it\nloved to clamber among precipices is equally evident from the repeated\nconnexion of the word rock with the name of the animal. We also see,\nfrom the passage in Job, that it is a wild animal whose habits were\nnot known. There is scarcely any doubt that the Azel of the Old\nTestament is the ARABIAN IBEX or BEDEN (_Capra Nubiana_). This animal\nis very closely allied to the well-known Ibex of the Alps, or\nSteinbock, but may be distinguished from it by one or two slight\ndifferences, such as the black beard and the slighter make of the\nhorns, which moreover have three angles instead of four, as is the\ncase with the Alpine Ibex.\n\nThe Beden is known by several names. It is sometimes called the Jaela,\nsometimes the Nubian Wild Goat, and is also known as the Wild Goat of\nSinai. The general colour of the Beden is grey, becoming brownish in\nwinter, and being whitish grey beneath. The feet are spotted with\nblack and white, and the beard of the male is black, differing from\nthat of the Alpine Ibex, which is brown. The female is beardless. The\nlines along the back and the sides of the tail are black, and there\nare three streaks on each ear.\n\nThe Beden generally lives in little herds of eight or ten, and is even\nnow to be found in Palestine. At the strange, wild, weird-looking\nEn-gedi (Ain Jiddy), or Fountain of the Goats, the Beden is still to\nbe seen. Mr. Tristram suggests that David and his followers took up\ntheir residence at En-gedi for the sake of the Wild Goats that were\nplentiful upon the spot, and which would furnish food for himself and\nhis hardy band of outlaws. \"In the neighbourhood of En-gedi,\" remarks\nthis traveller, \"while encamped by the Dead Sea shore, we obtained\nseveral fine specimens, and very interesting it was to find the\ngraceful creature by the very fountain to which it gave name.\n\n\"When clambering over the heights above En-gedi, I often, by the help\nof my glass, saw the Ibex from a distance, and once, when near\nMar-saba, only a few miles from Jerusalem, started one at a distance\nof four hundred yards. At the south end of the Dead Sea they were\ncommon, and I have picked up a horn both near Jericho on the hills and\nalso on the hills of Moab on the eastern side. At Jericho, too, I\nobtained a young one which I hoped to rear, but which died after I had\nhad it for ten days, owing, I believe, to the milk with which it was\nfed being sour. Further north and west we did not find it, though I\nhave reason to believe that a few linger on the mountains between\nSamaria and the Jordan, and perhaps also on some of the spurs of\nLebanon. We found its teeth in the breccia of bone occurring in the\nLebanon, proving its former abundance there.\"\n\nAs the Beden was found so plentifully even in these days when\nfire-arms have rendered many wild animals scarce and wary, so that\nthey will not show themselves within range of a bullet, it is evident\nthat in the time when David lived at En-gedi and drank of the Goats'\nFountain they were far more numerous, and could afford nourishment to\nhim and his soldiers. Travellers, moreover, who do not happen to be\nexperienced hunters, will often fail in seeing the Beden, even in\nplaces where it is tolerably plentiful. The colour of its coat\nresembles so nearly that of the rocks, that an inexperienced eye would\nsee nothing but bare stones and sticks where a practised hunter would\nsee numbers of Beden, conspicuous by their beautifully curved horns.\n\nThe agility of the Beden is extraordinary. Loving the highest and most\ncraggy parts of the mountain ridge, it flings itself from spot to spot\nwith a recklessness that startles one who has not been accustomed to\nthe animal, and the wonderful certainty of its foot. It will, for\nexample, dash at the face of a perpendicular precipice that looks as\nsmooth as a brick wall, for the purpose of reaching a tiny ledge which\nis hardly perceptible, and which is some fifteen feet or so above the\nspot whence the animal sprang. Its eye, however, has marked certain\nlittle cracks and projections on the face of the rock, and as the\nanimal makes its leap, it takes these little points of vantage in\nrapid succession, just touching them as it passes upwards, and by the\nslight stroke of its foot keeping up the original impulse of its leap.\nSimilarly, the Ibex comes sliding and leaping down precipitous sides\nof the mountains, sometimes halting with all the four feet drawn\ntogether, on a little projection scarcely larger than a penny, and\nsometimes springing boldly over a wide crevasse, and alighting with\nexact precision upon a projecting piece of rock that seems scarcely\nlarge enough to sustain a rat comfortably.\n\nThe young of the Ibex are sometimes captured and tamed. They are,\nhowever, difficult to rear, and give much more trouble than the young\ngazelles when taken in a similar manner. The natives can generally\nprocure the kids at the proper time of year, and sell them at a very\ncheap rate. They seldom, however, can be reared, and even those who\nlive in the country experience the greatest difficulty in keeping the\nyoung Beden alive until it attains maturity.\n\nWere it not for the curious habits of the Beden, the young could\nscarcely ever be obtained alive, as they are so agile that they could\neasily leap away from their slow two-legged pursuers. But the mother\nIbex has a habit of leading a very independent life, wandering to\nconsiderable distances, and leaving her kid snugly hidden in some\nrock-cleft. The hunters watch the mother as she starts off in the\nmorning, clamber up to the spot where the kid is concealed, and secure\nit without difficulty. The Arabs say that there are always two kids at\na birth, but there is considerable discrepancy of evidence on this\npoint, which, after all, is of very little importance.\n\n [Illustration: ARABIAN IBEX, OR BEDEN; THE WILD GOAT OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_The high hills are a refuge for the wild goats._\"--PSALM cxiv. 18.]\n\nThe flesh of the Beden is really excellent. It is far superior to that\nof the gazelle, which is comparatively dry and hard, and it has been\nhappily suggested that the Beden was the animal in search of which\nEsau was sent to hunt with his quiver and his bow, and which furnished\nthe \"savoury meat\" which Isaac loved. None but a true hunter can hope\nto secure the Beden, and even all the knowledge, patience, and energy\nof the best hunters are tried before they can kill their prey. It was\ntherefore no matter of wonder that Isaac should be surprised when he\nthought that he heard Esau return so soon from the hunting-grounds.\n\"How is it that thou hast found it so quickly, my son?\"\n\nThere are few animals more wary than the Beden, and even the chamois\nof the Alps does not exercise the finest qualities of a hunter more\nthan does the Beden of Palestine. It is gifted with very keen eyes,\nwhich can discern the approach of an enemy long before its grey coat\nand curved horns can be distinguished from the stones and gnarled\nboughs of the mountain side. And, even if the enemy be not within\nrange of the animal's sight, its nostrils are so keen that it can\ndetect a man by scent alone at a considerable distance. Like all\ngregarious animals, the Beden insures the safety of the flock by\nstationing sentries, which are posted on places that command the whole\nsurrounding country, and to deceive the watchful senses of these wary\nguardians tests all the qualities of the hunter.\n\nThe dawn of day is the time that is generally chosen for approaching a\nherd, because the animals are then feeding, and if the hunter can\nmanage to approach them against the wind, he may chance to come within\nrange. Should however the wind change its direction, he may quietly\nwalk home again, for at the first breath of the tainted gale the\nsentinels utter their shrill whistle of alarm, and the whole party\ndash off with a speed that renders pursuit useless.\n\nThe horns of the Beden are of very great size, and from their bold\ncurves, with the large rings and ridges which cover their front, are\nremarkably handsome objects. In their own country they are in great\nrequest as handles to knives, and even in England they may be\noccasionally seen serving as handles to carving-knives and forks.\n\nAs to the word Ako, which occurs in Deut. xiv. 5, together with other\nanimals, and is rendered as \"Wild Goat,\" there is so much doubt about\nthe correct translation that I can do no more than mention that the\nJewish Bible follows our authorized edition in translating Ako as Wild\nGoat, but adds the doubtful mark to the word.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DEER.\n\n The Hart and Hind of Scripture--Species of Deer existing in\n Palestine--Earliest mention of the Hind--The Hart classed among\n the clean animals--Passages alluding to its speed--Care of the\n mother for her young, and her custom of secreting it--Tameable\n character of the Deer--The Rabbinical writers and their\n theories--Shedding of the Deer's horns--Its fabled mode of\n sleeping--The gall in the tail--Curious traditions of the enmity\n between Deer and serpents--Virtues of a Deer-skin coat.\n\n\nWe now come to the DEER which are mentioned in Scripture. There are\nnot many passages in which they are mentioned, and one of them is\nrather doubtful, as we shall see when we come to it.\n\nThere is no doubt that the two words HART and HIND (in the Hebrew\n_Ayzal_ and _Ayzalah_) represent Deer of some kind, and the question\nis to find out what kind of Deer is signified by these words. I think\nthat we may safely determine that no particular species is meant, but\nthat under the word Ayzal are comprehended any kinds of Deer that\ninhabit Palestine, and were likely to be known to those to whom the\nearlier Scriptures were addressed. That some kind of Deer was\nplentiful is evident from the references which are made to it, and\nspecially by the familiar word Ajala or Ayala, as it is pronounced,\nwhich signifies the Deer-ground or pasture. But the attempt to\ndiscriminate between one species and another is simply impossible, and\nthe more careful the search the more impracticable the task appears.\n\nAs far as can be ascertained, at least two kinds of Deer inhabited\nPalestine in the earlier days of the Jewish history, one belonging to\nthe division which is known by its branched horns, and the other to\nthat in which the horns are flat or palmated over the tips. Examples\nof both kinds are familiar to us under the titles of the RED DEER and\nthe FALLOW DEER, and it is tolerably certain that both these animals\nwere formerly found in Palestine, or that at all events the Deer\nwhich did exist there were so closely allied to them as to be mere\nvarieties occasioned by the different conditions in which they were\nplaced.\n\n\nWe will now proceed to the various passages in which the Hart and Hind\nare mentioned in the Bible.\n\n [Illustration: FALLOW-DEER, OR HIND OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_I charge you ... by the hinds of the field._\"--CANT. ii. 7.]\n\nAs might be expected, we come upon it among the number of the beasts\nwhich divided the hoof and chewed the cud, and were specially\nindicated as fit for food; see Deut. xii. 15: \"Notwithstanding thou\nmayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates, ... the unclean and the\nclean may eat thereof, as of the roebuck, and as of the hart.\"\n\nThere is, however, an earlier mention of the word in Gen. xlix. 21. It\noccurs in that splendid series of imagery in which Jacob blesses his\nsons, and prophesies their future, each image serving ever afterwards\nas the emblem of the tribe: \"Naphtali is a hind let loose: he giveth\ngoodly words;\"--or, according to the Jewish Bible, \"Naphtali is a hind\nsent forth: he giveth sayings of pleasantness.\" Now, such an image as\nthis would never have been used, had not the spectacle of the \"hind\nlet loose\" been perfectly familiar to the eyes both of the dying\npatriarch and his hearers, and equally so with the lion, the ass, the\nvine, the serpent, and other objects used emblematically in the same\nprophetic poem.\n\nThe excellence of the Hart's flesh is shown by its occurrence among\nthe animals used for King Solomon's table; see 1 Kings iv. 23, a\npassage which has been quoted several times, and therefore need only\nbe mentioned.\n\nAllusion is made to the speed and agility of the Deer in several\npassages. See, for example, Isa. xxxv. 6: \"Then shall the lame man\nleap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing.\" Again, in 2 Sam.\nxxii. 33, 34: \"God is my strength and power: and He maketh my way\nperfect.\n\n\"He maketh my feet like hinds' feet: and setteth me upon my high\nplaces.\"\n\nNearly four hundred years afterwards we find Habakkuk using precisely\nthe same image, evidently quoting David's Psalm of Thanksgiving:--\"Yet\nI will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.\n\n\"The Lord God is my strength, and He will make my feet like hinds'\nfeet, and He will make me to walk upon mine high places.\" (iii. 18,\n19.)\n\nA passage of a similar character may be found in Solomon's Song, ii.\n8, 9: \"The voice of my beloved! behold, he cometh leaping upon the\nmountains, skipping upon the hills.\n\n\"My beloved is like a roe or a young hart.\"\n\nThere is one passage in the Psalms which is familiar to us in many\nways, and not the least in that it has been chosen as the text for so\nmany well-known anthems. \"As the hart panteth after the water-brooks,\nso panteth my soul after Thee, O God.\n\n\"My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God: when shall I come and\nappear before God?\" (Ps. xlii. 1, 2.)\n\nBeautiful as this passage is, it cannot be fully understood without\nthe context.\n\nDavid wrote this psalm before he had risen to royal power, and while\nhe was fleeing from his enemies from place to place, and seeking an\nuncertain shelter in the rock-caves. In verse 6 he enumerates some of\nthe spots in which he has been forced to reside, far away from the\naltar, the priests, and the sacrifice. He has been hunted about from\nplace to place by his enemies as a stag is hunted by the hounds, and\nhis very soul thirsted for the distant Tabernacle, in which the\nShekinah, the visible presence of God, rested on the mercy-seat\nbetween the golden cherubim.\n\nWild and unsettled as was the early life of David, this was ever the\nreigning thought in his mind, and there is scarcely a psalm that he\nwrote in which we do not find some allusion to the visible presence of\nGod among men. No matter what might be the troubles through which he\nhad to pass, even though he trod the valley of the shadow of death,\nthe thought of his God was soothing as water to the hunted stag, and\nin that thought he ever found repose. Through all his many trials and\nadversities, through his deep remorse for his sins, through his\nwounded paternal affections, through his success and prosperity, that\none thought is the ruling power. He begins his career with it when he\nopposed Goliath: \"Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear,\nand with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the Lord of\nhosts, the God of the armies of Israel.\" He closes his career with the\nsame thought, and, in the \"last words\" that are recorded, he charged\nhis son to keep the commandments of the Lord, that he might do wisely\nall that he did.\n\nWe now come to another point in the Deer's character; namely, the\nwatchful care of the mother over her young. She always retires to some\nsecret place when she instinctively knows that the birth is at hand,\nand she hides it from all eyes until it is able to take care of\nitself. By some strange instinct, the little one, almost as soon as it\nis born, is able to comprehend the signals of its mother, and there is\nan instance, well known to naturalists, where, a newly-born Deer,\nhardly an hour old, crouched low to the earth in obedience to a light\ntap on its shoulder from its mother's hoof. She, with the intense\nwatchfulness of her kind, had seen a possible danger, and so warned\nher young one to hide itself.\n\nThere is scarcely any animal so watchful as the female Deer, as all\nhunters know by practical experience. It is comparatively easy to\ndeceive the stag who leads the herd, but to evade the eyes and ears of\nthe hinds is a very different business, and taxes all the resources of\na practised hunter. If they take such care of the herd in general, it\nmay be imagined that their watchfulness would be multiplied tenfold\nwhen the object of their anxiety is their own young.\n\nIt is in allusion to this well-known characteristic that a passage in\nthe Book of Job refers: \"Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of\nthe rock bring forth? or canst thou mark when the hinds do calve?\"\n(xxxix. 1.) A similar image is used in Psa. xxix. 9. After enumerating\nthe wonders that are done by the voice of the Lord, the thunders and\nrain torrents, the devastating tempests, the forked lightning, and the\nearthquake \"that shaketh the wilderness of Kadesh,\" the Psalmist\nproceeds: \"The voice of the Lord maketh the hinds to calve, and\ndiscovereth the forests,\"--this being as mysterious to the writer as\nthe more conspicuous wonders which he had previously mentioned.\n\nSo familiar to the Hebrews was the watchful care which the female Deer\nexercised over her young, that it forms the subject of a powerful\nimage in one of Jeremiah's mournful prophecies: \"Yea, the hind also\ncalved in the field, and forsook it, because there was no grass.\"\n(xiv. 5.) To those who understand the habits of the animal, this is a\nmost telling and picturesque image. In the first place, the Hind, a\nwild animal that could find food where less active creatures would\nstarve, was reduced to such straits that she was obliged to remain in\nthe fields at the time when her young was born, instead of retiring to\nsome sheltered spot, according to her custom. And when it was born,\ninstead of nurturing it carefully, according to the natural maternal\ninstinct, she was forced from sheer hunger to abandon it in order to\nfind a sufficiency of food for herself.\n\nThat the Deer could be tamed, and its naturally affectionate\ndisposition cultivated, is evident from a passage in the Proverbs (v.\n18, 19): \"Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of\nthy youth. Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe.\"\n\n [Illustration: THE RED DEER.\n\n \"Canst thou mark when the hinds do calve?\"--JOB xxxix. 1.]\n\nWe might naturally expect that the Rabbinical writers would have\nmuch to say on the subject of the Hart and Hind. Among much that\nis irrelevant to the object of the present work there are a few\npassages that deserve mention. Alluding to the annual shedding of\nthe Deer's horns, there is a proverb respecting one who ventures his\nmoney too freely in trade, that \"he has hung it on the stag's horns,\"\nmeaning thereby that he will never see it again. It is remarkable that\nin Western Africa there is a proverb of a similar character, the\nimprudent merchant being told to look for his money in the place where\nDeer shed their horns.\n\nThey firmly believed that goats and Deer associate freely with each\nother, and that a mixed progeny was the result, but some of them\nmodify this statement by saying that this only holds good with the\nsmaller kinds of Deer, _i.e._ the gazelles and other antelopes. This\nabsurd notion has evidently taken its rise from the line of long\nbristly hair that decorates the throat of the adult male, and which\nthese unscientific writers took to be derived from the beard of the\ngoat.\n\nOn account of its watchfulness it was said always to sleep with one\neye open, \"which is well known to be the case with the hare.\" The\nancient Jews used to catch it with nets, and then domesticate it,\nfeeding it principally with a plant which has a very long and straight\nroot, which was used by Joshua as a wand of office when he pointed out\nto the Israelites the portion of ground on which each tribe had to\nencamp. What the plant might have been they cannot precisely\nascertain, and the looseness of their natural history may be imagined\nfrom the fact that some consider the plant in question to be the ivy\nand others the sugar-cane.\n\nSome of the Deer, says these old writers, join the herds of cattle,\nand even accompany them to their stalls for the night. The reason of\nthis gentleness of disposition seems to be found in the position of\nthe gall-bladder, which is said to be, not in the liver, but near the\ntail. It is remarkable, by the way, that Aristotle places it actually\nin the tail: \"The Achaian harts have their gall in their tails;\" while\nPliny thinks that the gall is placed in the ears.\n\nThe curious superstitions respecting the enmity between the Deer and\nthe serpent are of very old date, and have travelled all over the\nworld. They probably took their rise from the esoteric teachings\nwhich were hidden under the symbolism of animal life, and were\ntransmitted from country to country and from age to age, after the\nmanner of superstitions generally. According to one form of the\nsuperstition, the Deer can draw serpents out of their holes by\nbreathing into them, and then devour them; while, according to another\nform, there is such an enmity between the Deer and the serpent, that\nif even a portion of the Deer's horns be burned, all snakes that come\nwithin its influence are driven away.\n\nTopsell, in referring to this subject, although he feels himself bound\nto believe the tradition, accounts for it in his own quaint fashion.\n\"A Hart by his nose draweth a Serpent out of her hole, and therefore\nthe grammarians derived _Elaphas_, or Hart, from _elaunein tous\nopheis_, that is, of driving away serpents.\n\n\"I cannot consent to the opinion of _\u00c6lianus_, that affirmeth the\nSerpents to follow the breath of a Hart like some philter, or amorous\ncup: for, seeing that all authors hold a hostility in natures betwixt\nthem, it is not probable that the Serpent loveth the breath of a beast\nunto whose whole body he is an enemy with a perpetual antipathy. And\nif any reply that the warm breath of an Hart is acceptable to the cold\nSerpent, and that therefore she followeth it as a dog creepeth to the\nfire, or as other beasts to the beams of the sun, I will not greatly\ngainsay it, seeing by that means it is most clear that the breath doth\nnot by any secret force or vertue extract and draw her out of the den,\nbut rather the concomitant quality of heat, which is not from the\nsecret fire in the bones of the Hart's throat (as _Pliny_ hath\ntaught), but rather from her ordinary expiration, inspiration, and\nrespiration. For it cannot be, that seeing all the parts of a Serpent\nare opposite to a Hart, that there should be any love to that which\nkilleth her.\n\n\"For my opinion, I think that the manner of the Hart's drawing the\nSerpent out of her den is not, as _\u00c6lianus_ and _Pliny_ affirmeth, by\nsending into the cave a warm breath, which burneth and scorcheth the\nbeast out of her den, but rather, when the Hart hath found the\nSerpent's nest, she draweth the air by secret and violent attraction\nout from the Serpent, who, to save her life, followeth the air out of\nher den. As where a vessel is broached or wrecked, the wine followeth\nthe flying air; and as a cupping-glass draweth blood out of a\nscarified place of the body, so the Serpent is drawn unwillingly to\nfollow her destroyer, and not willingly, as _\u00c6lianus_ affirmeth. The\nSerpent being thus drawn forth, addeth greater force to her poyson,\nwhereupon the proverbial admonition did arise, 'Beware thou meet not\nwith a Serpent drawn out of her hole by the breath of a Hart, for at\nthat time, by reason of her wrath, her poyson is more vehement.' After\nthe self-same manner do the Sea-rams draw the Sea-calves hid in the\nsubterranean rocks, for by smelling they prevent the air that should\ncome into them for refrigeration.\"\n\nIn consequence of this antipathy, travellers were accustomed to wear\ndresses made of deer-skin, because no serpent would dare to bite any\none who wore such armour. The timidity of the Deer was attributed by\nthese strange old authors to the great size of its heart, in which\nthey thought was a bone shaped like a cross.\n\nAt the beginning of this article, I mentioned that in one passage the\nword which is translated as \"Hart\" is rendered differently in some\nversions. This passage occurs in Lam. i. 6: \"And from the daughter of\nZion all her beauty is departed: her princes are become like harts\nthat find no pasture, and they are gone without strength before the\npursuer.\" In some editions of the Hebrew Bible, the word Ayilim,\n_i.e._ \"rams,\" is used instead of Ayzalim, or \"Harts,\" and this\nreading is followed both by the Septuagint and the Vulgate. In two\neditions of the Hebrew Bible, however, the word is Ayzalim; and, as\nthe Jewish Bible retains that reading, we cannot do wrong in accepting\nit as the correct one.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CAMEL.\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n The two species of Camel, and the mode of distinguishing\n them--Value of the Camel in the East--Camels mentioned as\n elements of wealth--Uses of the Camel--The Jews forbidden to eat\n its flesh--The milk of the Camel--Thirst-enduring\n capability--The internal reservoir--The hump, and its use to the\n animal--The Camel as a beast of draught and burden--How the\n Camel is laden--Knowledge of its own powers--Camels for\n riding--Difficulty of sitting a Camel--A rough-paced\n steed--Method of guiding the Camel--The mesh'ab, or Camel-stick\n of office--The women's saddle--Rachel's stratagem--Ornaments of\n the Camel--The swift dromedary, Heirie, or Deloul--Its ungainly\n aspect--Speed and endurance of the Deloul--The Camel-posts of\n Bornu--Camel-drivers and their conduct--The driver's song--Young\n Camels and their appearance--The deserted Camel.\n\nBefore treating of the Scriptural references to the Camel, it will be\nas well to clear the ground by noticing that two distinct species of\nCamel are known to zoologists; namely, the common Camel (_Camelus\ndromedarius_), which has one hump, and the Bactrian Camel (_Camelus\nBactrianus_), which has two of these curious projections. There is a\npopular but erroneous idea that the dromedary and the Camel are two\ndistinct animals, the latter being distinguished by its huge hump,\nwhereas the fact is, that the dromedary is simply a lighter and more\nvaluable breed of the one-humped Camel of Arabia, the two-humped\nBactrian Camel being altogether a different animal, inhabiting Central\nAsia, Thibet, and China.\n\n\nThe Camel is still one of the most valued animals that inhabit\nPalestine, and in former times it played a part in Jewish history\nscarcely inferior to that of the ox or sheep. We shall, therefore,\ndevote some space to it.\n\nIn some parts of the land it even exceeded in value the sheep, and was\ninfinitely more useful than the goat. At the very beginning of Jewish\nhistory we read of this animal, and it is mentioned in the New\nTestament nearly two thousand years after we meet with it in the Book\nof Genesis. The earliest mention of the Camel occurs in Gen. xii. 16,\nwhere is related the journey of Abram: \"He had sheep, and oxen, and\nhe-asses, and men-servants, and maid-servants, and she-asses, and\ncamels.\"\n\nBelonging, as he did, to the nomad race which lives almost wholly on\nthe produce of their herds, Abram needed Camels, not only for their\nmilk, and, for all we know, for their flesh, but for their extreme use\nas beasts of burden, without which he could never have travelled over\nthat wild and pathless land. The whole of Abram's outer life was\nexactly that of a Bedouin sheikh of the present day, in whom we find\nreproduced the habits, the tone of thought, and the very verbiage of\nthe ancient Scriptures.\n\nMany years afterwards, when the son of his old age was desirous of\nmarrying a wife of his own kindred, we find that he sent his trusted\nservants with ten of his Camels to Mesopotamia, and it was by the\noffering of water to these Camels, that Rebekah was selected as\nIsaac's wife (see Gen. xxiv. 10, 19). In after days, when Jacob was\nabout to leave Laban, these animals are mentioned as an important part\nof his wealth: \"And the man increased exceedingly, and had much\ncattle, and maid-servants, and men-servants, and camels, and asses\"\n(Gen. xxx. 43). Then, in Exod. ix. 3, one of the severest plagues with\nwhich Egypt was afflicted was the disease which fell upon the Camels\nin common with the other cattle.\n\nIt is thought worthy of mention in the sacred narrative that Job had\nthree thousand, and afterwards six thousand Camels (Job i. 3, and\nxlii. 12); that the Midianites and Amalekites possessed \"camels\nwithout number, as the sand by the seaside for multitude\" (Judg. vii.\n12); and that the Reubenites, when making war against the Hagarites,\ntook from them fifty thousand camels--exactly the very object of such\nwars in the same land at the present time.\n\nThey were valuable enough to be sent as presents from one potentate to\nanother. For example, when Jacob went to meet Esau, he gave as his\npresent two hundred and twenty sheep, the same number of goats, fifty\noxen, thirty asses, and sixty camels, _i.e._ thirty mothers, each with\nher calf. They were important enough to be guarded by men of position.\nIn 1 Chron. xxvii. 30, we find that the charge of David's Camels was\nconfided to one of his officers, Obil the Ishmaelite, who, from his\norigin, might be supposed to be skilful in the management of these\nanimals. Bochart however, conjectures that the word Obil ought to be\nread as Abal, _i.e._ the camel-keeper, and that the passage would\ntherefore read as follows: \"Over the camels was an Ishmaelitish\ncamel-keeper.\"\n\n\nWe will now proceed to the uses of the Camel, and first take it in the\nlight of food.\n\nBy the Mosaic law, the Camel was a forbidden animal, because it did\nnot divide the hoof, although it chewed the cud. Yet, although the\nJews might not eat its flesh, they probably used the milk for food, as\nthey do at the present day. No distinct Scriptural reference is made\nto the milk of the Camel; but, as the Jews of the present day are\nquite as fastidious as their ancestors in keeping the Mosaic law, we\nare justified in concluding that, although they would not eat the\nflesh of the animal, they drank its milk. At the present time, the\nmilk is used, like that of the sheep, goat, and cow, both in a fresh\nand curdled state, the latter being generally preferred to the former.\nA kind of cheese is made from it, but is not much to the taste of the\nEuropean traveller, on account of the quantity of salt which is put in\nit. Butter is churned in a very simple manner, the fresh milk being\npoured into a skin bag, and the bag beaten with a stick until the\nbutter makes its appearance.\n\nThat it was really used in the patriarchal times is evident by the\npassage which has already been mentioned, where Jacob is related to\nhave brought as a present to his brother Esau thirty milch Camels,\ntogether with their young. So decided a stress would certainly not\nhave been laid upon the fact that the animals were milch Camels unless\nthe milk were intended for use.\n\nPerhaps the use of the Camel's milk might be justified by saying that\nthe prohibition extended only to eating and not to drinking, and that\ntherefore the milk might be used though the flesh was prohibited.\n\nThere was another mode in which the Camel might be used by travellers\nto sustain life.\n\nThe reader is probably aware that, even in the burning climate in\nwhich it dwells, the Camel is able to go for a long time without\ndrinking,--not that it requires less liquid nourishment than other\nanimals, but that it is able, by means of its internal construction,\nto imbibe at one draught a quantity of water which will last for a\nconsiderable time. It is furnished with a series of cells, into which\nthe water runs as fast as it is drunk, and in which it can be kept for\nsome time without losing its life-preserving qualities. As much as\ntwenty gallons have been imbibed by a Camel at one draught, and this\namount will serve it for several days, as it has the power of\nconsuming by degrees the water which it has drunk in a few minutes.\n\nThis curious power of the Camel has often proved to be the salvation\nof its owner. It has often happened that, when travellers have been\npassing over the desert, their supply of water has been exhausted,\npartly by the travellers and partly by the burning heat which causes\nit to evaporate through the pores of the goat-skin bottle in which it\nwas carried. Then the next well, where they had intended to refill\ntheir skins and refresh themselves, has proved dry, and the whole\nparty seemed doomed to die of thirst.\n\nUnder these circumstances, only one chance of escape is left them.\nThey kill a Camel, and from its stomach they procure water enough to\nsustain life for a little longer, and perhaps to enable them to reach\na well or fountain in which water still remains. The water which is\nthus obtained is unaltered, except by a greenish hue, the result of\nmixing with the remains of herbage in the cells. It is, of course,\nvery disagreeable, but those who are dying from thirst cannot afford\nto be fastidious, and to them the water is a most delicious draught.\n\nIt is rather curious that, if any of the water which is taken out of a\ndead Camel can be kept for a few days, both the green hue and the\nunpleasant flavour disappear, and the water becomes fresh, clear, and\nlimpid. So wonderfully well do the internal cells preserve the water,\nthat after a Camel has been dead for ten days--and in that hot climate\nten days after death are equal to a month in England--the water within\nit has been quite pure and drinkable.\n\nMany persons believe in the popular though erroneous idea that the\nCamel does not require as much water as ordinary animals. He will see,\nhowever, from the foregoing account that it needs quite as much water\nas the horse or the ox, but that it possesses the capability of taking\nin at one time as much as either of these animals would drink in\nseveral days. So far from being independent of water, there is no\nanimal that requires it more, or displays a stronger desire for it. A\nthirsty Camel possesses the power of scenting water at a very great\ndistance, and, when it does so, its instincts conquer its education,\nand it goes off at full speed towards the spot, wholly ignoring its\nrider or driver. Many a desert spring has been discovered, and many a\nlife saved, by this wonderful instinct, the animal having scented the\ndistant water when its rider had lost all hope, and was resigning\nhimself to that terrible end, the death by thirst. The sacred Zemzem\nfountain at Mecca was discovered by two thirsty Camels.\n\nExcept by the Jews, the flesh of the Camel is eaten throughout\nPalestine and the neighbouring countries, and is looked upon as a\ngreat luxury. The Arab, for example, can scarcely have a greater treat\nthan a Camel-feast, and looks forward to it in a state of wonderful\nexcitement. He is so impatient, that scarcely is the animal dead\nbefore it is skinned, cut up, and the various parts prepared for\ncooking.\n\nTo European palates the flesh of the Camel is rather unpleasant, being\ntough, stringy, and without much flavour. The fatty hump is\nuniversally considered as the best part of the animal, and is always\noffered to the chief among the guests, just as the North American\nIndian offers the hump of the bison to the most important man in the\nassembly. The heart and the tongue, however, are always eatable, and,\nhowever old a Camel may be, these parts can be cooked and eaten\nwithout fear.\n\nThe hump, or \"bunch\" as it is called in the Bible, has no connexion\nwith the spine, and is a supplementary growth, which varies in size,\nnot only in the species, but in the individual. It is analogous to the\nhump upon the shoulders of the American bison and the Indian zebra,\nand in the best-bred Camels it is the smallest though the finest and\nmost elastic.\n\nThis hump, by the way, affords one of the points by which the value of\nthe Camel is decided. When it is well fed and properly cared for, the\nhump projects boldly, and is firm and elastic to the touch. But if the\nCamel be ill, or if it be badly fed or overworked, the hump becomes\nsoft and flaccid, and in bad cases hangs down on one side like a thick\nflap of skin. Consequently, the dealers in Camels always try to\nproduce their animals in the market with their humps well developed;\nand, if they find that this important part does not look satisfactory,\nthey use various means to give it the required fulness, inflating it\nwith air being the most common. In fact, there is as much deception\namong Camel-dealers in Palestine as with dog or pigeon fanciers in\nEngland.\n\nHere perhaps I may remark that the hump has given rise to some strange\nbut prevalent views respecting the Camel. Many persons think that the\ndromedary has one hump and the Camel two--in fact, that they are two\ntotally distinct animals. Now the fact is that the Camel of Palestine\nis of one species only, the dromedary being a lighter and swifter\nbreed, and differing from the ordinary Camel just as a hunter or racer\ndiffers from a cart-horse. The two-humped Camel is a different species\naltogether, which will be briefly described at the end of the present\narticle.\n\n\nThe Camel is also used as a beast of draught, and, as we find, not\nonly from the Scriptures, but from ancient monuments, was employed to\ndraw chariots and drag the plough. Thus in Isa. xxi. 7: \"And he saw a\nchariot with a couple of horsemen, a chariot of asses, and a chariot\nof camels.\" It is evident that in this passage some chariots were\ndrawn by Camels and some by asses. It is, however, remarkable that in\nKennard's \"Eastern Experiences,\" these two very useful animals are\nmentioned as being yoked together: \"We passed through a fertile\ncountry, watching the fellaheen at their agricultural labours, and not\na little amused at sometimes remarking a very tall camel and a very\nsmall donkey yoked together in double harness, dragging a plough\nthrough the rich brown soil.\" Camels drawing chariots are still to be\nseen in the Assyrian sculptures. In Palestine--at all events at the\npresent time--the Camel is seldom if ever used as a beast of draught,\nbeing exclusively employed for bearing burdens and carrying riders.\n\nTaking it first as a beast of burden, we find several references in\ndifferent parts of the Scriptures. For example, see 2 Kings viii. 9:\n\"So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even of\nevery good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden.\" Again, in 1\nChron. xii. 40: \"Moreover they that were nigh them, even unto Issachar\nand Zebulun and Naphtali, brought bread on asses, and on camels, and\non mules, and on oxen.\" Another allusion to the same custom is made in\nIsaiah: \"They will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young\nasses, and their treasures upon the bunches (or humps) of camels.\"\n\nThe Camel can carry a considerable load, though not so much as is\ngenerally fancied. A sort of a pack-saddle of a very simple\ndescription is used, in order to keep the burden upon so\nstrangely-shaped an animal. A narrow bag about eight feet long is\nmade, and rather loosely stuffed with straw or similar material. It is\nthen doubled, and the ends firmly sewn together, so as to form a great\nring, which is placed over the hump, and forms a tolerably flat\nsurface. A wooden framework is tied on the pack-saddle, and is kept in\nits place by a girth and a crupper. The packages which the Camel is to\ncarry are fastened together by cords, and slung over the saddle. They\nare only connected by those semi-knots called \"hitches,\" so that, when\nthe Camel is to be unloaded, all that is needed is to pull the lower\nend of the rope, and the packages fall on either side of the animal.\nSo quickly is the operation of loading performed, that a couple of\nexperienced men can load a Camel in very little more than a minute.\n\nAs is the case with the horse in England, the Camels that are used as\nbeasts of burden are of a heavier, slower, and altogether inferior\nbreed to those which are employed to carry riders, and all their\naccoutrements are of a ruder and meaner order, devoid of the fantastic\nornaments with which Oriental riders are fond of decorating their\nfavourite animals.\n\n [Illustration: CAMEL.\n\n \"They will carry their treasures upon the bunches of camels.\"--ISA.\n xxx. 6.]\n\nIn the large illustration are represented two of the ordinary Camels\nof burden, as they appear when laden with boughs for the Feast of\nTabernacles. The branches are those of the Hebrew pine, and, as may be\nseen, the animals are so heavily laden with them that their forms are\nquite hidden under their leafy burdens. The weight which a Camel will\ncarry varies much, according to the strength of the individual, which\nhas given rise to the Oriental proverb, \"As the camel, so the load.\"\nBut an animal of ordinary strength is supposed to be able to carry\nfrom five to six hundred pounds for a short journey, and half as much\nfor a long one,--a quantity which, as the reader will see, is not so\nvery great when the bulk of the animal is taken into consideration.\nIt is remarkable that the Camel knows its own powers, and\ninstinctively refuses to move if its correct load be exceeded. But,\nwhen it is properly loaded, it will carry its burden for hours\ntogether at exactly the same pace, and without seeming more fatigued\nthan it was when it started.\n\nThe riding Camels are always of a better breed than those which are\nused for burden, and may be divided into two classes; namely, those\nwhich are meant for ordinary purposes, and those which are specially\nbred for speed and endurance. There is as much difference between the\nordinary riding Camel and the swift Camel as there is between the road\nhack and the race-horse. We will first begin with the description of\nthe common riding Camel and its accoutrements.\n\nThe saddle which is intended for a rider is very different from the\npack-saddle on which burdens are carried, and has a long upright\nprojection in front, to which the rider can hold if he wishes it.\n\nThe art of riding the Camel is nearly as difficult of accomplishment\nas that of riding the horse, and the preliminary operation of mounting\nis not the least difficult portion of it. Of course, to mount a Camel\nwhile the animal is standing is impossible, and accordingly it is\ntaught to kneel until the rider is seated. Kneeling is a natural\nposition with the Camel, which is furnished with large callosities or\nwarts on the legs and breast, which act as cushions on which it may\nrest its great weight without abrading the skin. These callosities are\nnot formed, as some have imagined, by the constant kneeling to which\nthe Camel is subjected, but are born with it, though of course less\ndeveloped than they are after they have been hardened by frequent\npressure against the hot sand.\n\nWhen the Camel kneels, it first drops on its knees, and then on the\njoints of the hind legs. Next it drops on its breast, and then again\non the bent hind legs. In rising it reverses the process, so that a\nnovice is first pitched forward, then backward, then forward, and then\nbackward again, to the very great disarrangement of his garments, and\nthe probable loss of his seat altogether. Then when the animal kneels\nhe is in danger of being thrown over its head by the first movement,\nand jerked over its tail by the second; but after a time he learns to\nkeep his seat mechanically.\n\nAs to the movement of the animal, it is at first almost as unpleasant\nas can be conceived, and has been described by several travellers,\nsome of whose accounts will be here given. First comes Albert Smith,\nwho declares that any one who wants to practise Camel-riding in\nEngland can do so by taking a music-stool, screwing it up as high as\npossible, putting it into a cart without springs, sitting on the top\nof it cross-legged, and having the cart driven at full speed\ntransversely over a newly ploughed field.\n\nThere is, however, as great a difference in the gait of Camels as of\nhorses, some animals having a quiet, regular, easy movement, while\nothers are rough and high-stepping, harassing their riders grievously\nin the saddle. Even the smooth-going Camel is, however, very trying at\nfirst, on account of its long swinging strides, which are taken with\nthe legs of each side alternately, causing the body of the rider to\nswing backwards and forwards as if he were rowing in a boat.\n\nThose who suffer from sea-sickness are generally attacked with the\nsame malady when they make their first attempts at Camel-riding, while\neven those who are proof against this particular form of discomfort\nsoon begin to find that their backs are aching, and that the pain\nbecomes steadily worse. Change of attitude is but little use, and the\nwretched traveller derives but scant comfort from the advice of his\nguide, who tells him to allow his body to swing freely, and that in a\nshort time he will become used to it. Some days, however, are\ngenerally consumed before he succeeds in training his spine to the\ncontinual unaccustomed movement, and he finds that, when he wakes on\nthe morning that succeeds his first essay, his back is so stiff that\nhe can scarcely move without screaming with pain, and that the\nprospect of mounting the Camel afresh is anything but a pleasant one.\n\n\"I tried to sit erect without moving,\" writes Mr. Kennard, when\ndescribing his experience of Camel-riding. \"This proved a relief for a\nfew minutes, but, finding the effort too great to continue long in\nthis position, I attempted to recline with my head resting upon my\nhand. This last manoeuvre I found would not do, for the motion of the\ncamel's hind legs was so utterly at variance with the motion of his\nfore-legs that I was jerked upwards, and forwards, and sideways, and\nfinally ended in nearly rolling off altogether.\n\n\"Without going into the details of all that I suffered for the next\ntwo or three days--how that on several occasions I slid from the\ncamel's back to the ground, in despair of ever accustoming my\nhalf-dislocated joints to the ceaseless jerking and swaying to and\nfro, and how that I often determined to trudge on foot over the hot\ndesert sand all the way to Jerusalem rather than endure it longer--I\nshall merely say that the day did at last arrive when I descended from\nmy camel, after many hours' riding, in as happy and comfortable a\nstate of mind as if I had been lolling in the easiest of arm-chairs.\"\n\nA very similar description of the transition from acute and constant\nsuffering to perfect ease is given by Albert Smith, who states that\nmore than once he has dozed on the back of his Camel, in spite of the\nswaying backwards and forwards to which his body was subjected.\n\nIf such be the discomfort of riding a smooth-going and good-tempered\nCamel, it may be imagined that to ride a hard-going and cross-grained\nanimal must be a very severe trial to an inexperienced rider. A very\namusing account of a ride on such a Camel, and of a fall from its\nback, is given by Mr. Hamilton in his \"Sinai, the Hedjaz, and\nSoudan:\"--\n\n\"A dromedary I had obtained at Suk Abu Sin for my own riding did not\nanswer my expectations, or rather the saddle was badly put on--not an\neasy thing to do well, by the way--and one of my servants, who saw how\nout of patience I was at the many times I had had to dismount to have\nit arranged, persuaded me to try the one he was riding, the Sheik's\npresent. I had my large saddle transferred to his beast, and, nothing\ndoubting, mounted it.\n\n\"He had not only no nose-string, but was besides a vicious brute,\nrising with a violent jerk before I was well in the saddle, and\nanxious to gain the caravan, which was a little way ahead, he set off\nat his roughest gallop. Carpets, kufieh, tarbush, all went off in the\njolting; at every step I was thrown a foot into the air, glad to come\ndown again, bump, bump, on the saddle, by dint of holding on to the\nfront pommel with the left hand, while the right was engaged with the\nbridle, which in the violence of the exercise it was impossible to\nchange to its proper hand. I had almost reached the caravan, and had\nno doubt my humpbacked Pegasus would relax his exertions, when a\ncamel-driver, one of the sons of iniquity, seeing me come up at full\nspeed, and evidently quite run away with, took it into his head to\ncome to my assistance.\n\n\"I saw what he was at, and called out to him to get out of the way,\nbut instead of this he stuck himself straight before me, stretching\nhimself out like a St. Andrew's cross, with one hand armed with a huge\nclub, and making most diabolical grimaces. Of course the camel was\nfrightened, it was enough to frighten a much more reasonable being;\nso, wheeling quickly round, it upset my unstable equilibrium. Down I\ncame head foremost to the ground, and when I looked up, my forehead\nstreaming with blood, the first thing I saw was my Arab with the\ncamel, which he seemed mightily pleased with himself for having so\ncleverly captured, while the servant who had suggested the unlucky\nexperiment came ambling along on my easy-paced dromedary, and consoled\nme by saying that he knew it was a runaway beast, which there was no\nriding without a nose-string.\n\n\"I now began to study the way of keeping one's seat in such an\nemergency. An Arab, when he gallops his dromedary with one of these\nsaddles, holds hard on with the right hand to the back part of the\nseat, not to the pommel, and grasps the bridle tightly in the other.\nThe movement of the camel in galloping throws one violently forward,\nand without holding on, excepting on the naked back, when the rider\nsits behind the hump, it is impossible to retain one's seat. I\nafterwards thought myself lucky in not having studied this point\nsooner, as, from the greater resistance I should have offered, my\ntumble, since it was _fated_ I should have one, would probably have\nbeen much more severe. It is true I might also have escaped it, but in\nthe chapter of probabilities I always think a mishap the most\nprobable.\"\n\nIt may be imagined that a fall from a Camel's back is not a trifle,\nand, even if the unskilful rider be fortunate enough to fall on soft\nsand instead of hard rock, he receives a tolerably severe shock, and\nruns no little risk of breaking a limb. For the average height of a\nCamel's back is rather more than six feet, while some animals measure\nseven feet from the ground to the top of the hump. Add to this a foot\nor two caused by the saddle and its cushions, and a height is gained\nequal to that of the ceiling of many rooms--say, eighteen inches above\nthe top of an ordinary door.\n\nThis height, however, is of material advantage to the traveller. In\nthe first place it lifts him above the waves of heated air that are\ncontinually rolling over the sand on which the burning rays of the sun\nare poured throughout the day; and in the second place it brings him\nwithin reach of the slightest breeze that passes above the stratum of\nhot air, and which comes to the traveller like the breath of life.\nMoreover, his elevated position enables him to see for a very great\ndistance, which is an invaluable advantage in a land where every\nstranger may be a robber, and is probably a murderer besides.\n\nThe best mode of avoiding a fall is to follow the Arab mode of\nriding,--namely, to pass one leg over the upright pommel, which, as\nhas been mentioned, is a mere wooden peg or stake, and hitching the\nother leg over the dangling foot. Perhaps the safest, though not the\nmost comfortable, mode of sitting is by crossing the legs in front,\nand merely grasping the pommel with the hands.\n\nYet, fatiguing as is the seat on the Camel's back to the beginner, it\nis less so than that on the horse's saddle, inasmuch as in the latter\ncase one position is preserved, while in the former an infinite\nvariety of seat is attainable when the rider has fairly mastered the\nart of riding.\n\nThe Camel is not held by the bit and bridle like the horse, but by a\nrope tied like a halter round the muzzle, and having a knot on the\nleft or \"near\" side. This is held in the left hand, and is used\nchiefly for the purpose of stopping the animal. The Camel is guided\npartly by the voice of its rider, and partly by a driving-stick, with\nwhich the neck is lightly touched on the opposite side to that which\nits rider wishes it to take. A pressure of the heel on the\nshoulder-bone tells it to quicken its pace, and a little tap on the\nhead followed by a touch on the short ears are the signals for full\nspeed.\n\nThere are three different kinds of stick with which the Camel is\ndriven; one of them, a mere almond branch with the bark, and an\noblique head, is the sceptre or emblem of sovereignty of the Prince of\nMecca. Mr. Hamilton suggests that this stick, called the \"_mesh'ab_,\"\nis the original of the jackal-headed stick with which so many of the\nEgyptian deities are represented; and that Aaron's rod that \"brought\nforth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded almonds,\" was the\n_mesh'ab_, the almond-branch sceptre, the emblem of his almost regal\nrank and authority.\n\nThe women mostly ride in a different manner from the men. Sometimes\nthey are hardy enough to sit the animal in the same way as their\nhusbands, but as a rule they are carried by the animal rather than\nride it, sitting in great basket-like appendages which are slung on\neither side of the Camel. These constitute the \"furniture\" which is\nmentioned in Gen. xxxi. 34. When Jacob left the house of Laban, to\nlead an independent life, Rachel stole her father's images, or\n\"teraphim,\" and carried them away with her, true to her affectionate\nthough deceptive nature, which impelled her to incur the guilt of\nrobbery for the sake of enriching her husband with the cherished\nteraphim of her father. From the most careful researches we learn that\nthese teraphim were used for divining the future, and that they were\nmade in the human form. That they were of considerable size is evident\nfrom the fact that, when Saul was hunting after David, his wife Michal\ncontrived to convey him out of the house, and for a time to conceal\nher fraud by putting an image (or teraph) into the bed as a\nrepresentative of her husband. Had not, therefore, the camel-furniture\nbeen of considerable dimensions, images of such a size could not be\nhidden, but they could well be stowed away in the great panniers, as\nlong as their mistress sat upon them, after the custom of Oriental\ntravellers, and declined to rise on the ready plea of indisposition.\n\nThis sort of carriage is still used for the women and children. \"The\nwife and child came by in the string of camels, the former reclining\nin an immense circular box, stuffed and padded, covered with red\ncotton, and dressed with yellow worsted ornaments. This family nest\nwas mounted on a large camel. It seemed a most commodious and\nwell-arranged travelling carriage, and very superior as a mode of\ncamel-riding to that which our Sitteen rejoiced in (_i.e._ riding upon\na saddle). The Arab wife could change her position at pleasure, and\nthe child had room to walk about and could not fall out, the sides of\nthe box just reaching to its shoulders. Various jugs and skins and\narticles of domestic use hung suspended about it, and trappings of\nfringe and finery ornamented it.\"\n\nThis last sentence brings us to another point which is several times\nmentioned in the Bible; namely, the ornaments with which the\nproprietors of Camels are fond of bedizening their favourite animals.\n\nTheir leathern collars are covered with cowrie shells sewn on them in\nvarious fantastic patterns. Crescent-shaped ornaments are made of\nshells sewn on red cloth, and hung so abundantly upon the harness of\nthe animal that they jingle at every step which it takes. Sheiks and\nother men of rank often have these ornaments made of silver, so that\nthe cost of the entire trappings is very great. Allusion is made to\nthese costly ornaments in Judges viii. When Gideon warred against\nSuccoth, he captured the two chiefs or kings of Midian, Zebah and\nZalmunna, and, after putting them to death, he \"took away the\nornaments that were on their camels' necks,\"--or, as the marginal\ntranslation has it, their \"ornaments like the moon,\" _i.e._\ncrescent-shaped; this form having been retained unchanged for three\nthousand years. (Judges viii. 21.) The value of such ornaments is\nevident from the fact that they are mentioned so conspicuously in Holy\nWrit; and, as if to show that the Camel trappings were of very\nconsiderable value, a further reference is made to them in the\nfollowing passage. After the battle, Gideon made a request to his\nsoldiers \"that ye would give me every man the earrings of his prey.\n(For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.)\n\n\"And they answered, We will willingly give them. And they spread a\ngarment, and did cast therein every man the earrings of his prey. And\nthe weight of the golden earrings that he requested was a thousand and\nseven hundred shekels of gold; beside ornaments, and collars, and\npurple raiment that was on the kings of Midian, and beside the chains\nthat were about their camels' necks.\" Here we see that the ornaments\nto the Camels were sufficiently costly to be classed with the golden\njewellery and the royal apparel that were worn by the kings of Midian.\n\n\nWe now come to the Swift Camel, sometimes called the Heirie, the\nMaharik, or the Deloul, the last of these terms being that by which it\nwill be mentioned in these pages.\n\nThe limbs of the Deloul are long and wiry, having not an ounce of\nsuperfluous fat upon them, the shoulders are very broad, and the hump,\nthough firm and hard, is very small.\n\nA thoroughbred Deloul, in good travelling condition, is not at all a\npleasing animal to an ordinary eye, being a lank, gaunt, and\nungainly-looking creature, the very conformation which insures its\nswiftness and endurance being that which detracts from its beauty. An\nArab of the desert, however, thinks a good Deloul one of the finest\nsights in the world. As the talk of the pastoral tribes is of sheep\nand oxen, so is the talk of the nomads about Camels. It is a subject\nwhich is for ever on their lips, and a true Bedouin may be seen to\ncontemplate the beauties of one of these favourite animals for hours\nat a time,--if his own, with the rapture of a possessor, or, if\nanother's, with the determination of stealing it when he can find an\nopportunity.\n\nInstead of plodding along at the rate of three miles an hour, which is\nthe average speed of the common Camel, the Deloul can cover, if\nlightly loaded, nine or ten miles an hour, and go on at the same pace\nfor a wonderful time, its long legs swinging, and its body swaying, as\nif it were but an animated machine. Delouls have been reported to have\njourneyed for nearly fifty hours without a single stop for rest,\nduring which time the animals must have traversed nearly five hundred\nmiles. Such examples must, however, be exceptional, implying, as they\ndo, an amount of endurance on the part of the rider equal to that of\nthe animal; and even a journey of half that distance is scarcely\npossible to ordinary men on Delouls.\n\nFor the movements of the Deloul are very rough, and the rider is\nobliged to prepare himself for a long journey by belting himself\ntightly with two leathern bands, one just under the arms, and the\nother round the pit of the stomach. Without these precautions, the\nrider would be likely to suffer serious injuries, and, even with them,\nthe exercise is so severe, that an Arab makes it a matter of special\nboast that he can ride a Deloul for a whole day.\n\nA courier belonging to the Sherif of Mecca told Mr. Hamilton that he\noften went on the same dromedary from Mecca to Medina in forty-eight\nhours, the distance being two hundred and forty miles. And a\nthoroughbred Deloul will travel for seven or eight weeks with only\nfour or five days of rest.\n\nEven at the present time, these Camels are used for the conveyance of\nspecial messages, and in the remarkable Bornu kingdom a regular\nservice of these animals is established, two couriers always\ntravelling in company, so that if one rider or Camel should fail or\nbe captured by the Arabs, who are always on the alert for so valuable\na prey, the other may post on and carry the message to its\ndestination.\n\n [Illustration: THE CAMEL POST.]\n\nThe swift dromedary, or Deloul, is mentioned several times in the Old\nTestament. One of them occurs in Isa. lx. 6: \"The multitude of camels\nshall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah.\" In this\npassage a distinction is drawn between the ordinary Camel and the\nswift dromedary, the former being the word \"gamel,\" and the latter the\nword \"beker,\" which is again used in Jer. ii. 23: \"See thy way in the\nvalley, know what thou hast done: thou art a swift dromedary.\"\n\nThere is a passage in the Book of Esther which looks as if it referred\nto the ordinary Camel and the swift dromedary, but there is\nconsiderable uncertainty about the proper rendering. It runs as\nfollows: \"And he wrote in king Ahasuerus' name, and sealed it with the\nking's ring, and sent letters and posts on horseback, and riders on\nmules, camels, and young dromedaries.\"\n\nThe Jewish Bible, however, translates this passage as follows: \"And\nsent letters by the runners on the horses, and riders on the racers,\nmules, and young mares.\" Now, the word _rekesh_, which is translated\nas \"racer,\" is rendered by Buxtorf as \"a swift horse or mule,\" and the\nword _beni-rammachim_, which is translated as \"young mares,\" literally\nsignifies \"those born of mares.\"\n\nThe Camel-drivers behave towards their animals with the curious\ninconsistency which forms so large a part of the Oriental character.\n\nPrizing them above nearly all earthly things, proud of them, and\nloving them after their own fashion, the drivers will talk to them,\ncheer them, and sing interminable songs for their benefit. Towards the\nafternoon the singing generally begins, and it goes on without\ncessation in a sort of monotonous hum, as Dr. Bonar calls it. The same\ntraveller calls attention to a passage in Caussinus' \"Polyhistor\nSymbolicus,\" in which the learned and didactic author symbolizes the\nmaxim that more can be done by kindness than by blows. \"The Camel is\ngreatly taken with music and melody. So much so, indeed, that if it\nhalts through weariness, the driver does not urge it with stripes and\nblows, but soothes it by his songs.\"\n\nSeveral travellers have mentioned these songs. See, for example, Miss\nRogers' account of some Bedouins: \"Their songs were already subdued to\nharmonize with their monotonous swinging pace, and chimed softly and\nplaintively with the tinkling of camel-bells, thus--\n\n \"'Dear unto me as the sight of mine eyes,\n Art thou, O my Camel!\n Precious to me as the health of my life,\n Art thou, O my Camel!\n Sweet to my ears is the sound\n Of thy tinkling bells, O my Camel!\n And sweet to thy listening ears\n Is the sound of my evening song.'\n\nAnd so on, _ad libitum_.\"\n\nSometimes a female Camel gives birth to a colt on the journey. In such\na case, a brief pause is made, and then the train proceeds on its\njourney, the owner of the Camel carrying the young one in his arms\nuntil the evening halt. He then gives it to its mother, and on the\nfollowing day it is able to follow her without further assistance. The\nyoung Camels are almost pretty, their hair being paler than that of\nthe adult animal, and their limbs more slender.\n\nAlthough the young Camel is better-looking than its parents, it is not\none whit more playful. Unlike almost all other animals, the Camel\nseems to have no idea of play, and even the young Camel of a month or\ntwo old follows its mother with the same steady, regular pace which\nshe herself maintains.\n\nIn spite of all the kindness with which a driver treats his Camels, he\ncan at times be exceedingly cruel to them, persisting in over-loading\nand over-driving them, and then, if a Camel fall exhausted, removing\nits load, and distributing it among the other Camels. As soon as this\nis done, he gives the signal to proceed, and goes on his way,\nabandoning the wretched animal to its fate--_i.e._ to thirst and the\nvultures. He will not even have the humanity to kill it, but simply\nleaves it on the ground, muttering that it is \"his fate!\"\n\n\nTHE CAMEL.\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n The Camel and its master--Occasional fury of the animal--A boy\n killed by a Camel--Another instance of an infuriated\n Camel--Theory respecting the Arab and his Camel--Apparent\n stupidity of the Camel--Its hatred of a load, and mode of\n expressing its disapprobation--Riding a Camel through the\n streets--A narrow escape--Ceremony of weaning a young Camel--The\n Camel's favourite food--Structure of the foot and adaptation to\n locality--Difficulty in provisioning--Camel's hair and skin--Sal\n ammoniac and Desert fuel--The Camel and the needle's\n eye--Straining at a gnat and swallowing a Camel.\n\nWe now come to the general characteristics of the Camel.\n\nThe Camels know their master well, some of them being much more\naffectionate than others. But they are liable to fits of strange\nfury, in which case even their own masters are not safe from them.\nThey are also of a revengeful nature, and have an unpleasant faculty\nof treasuring up an injury until they can find a time of repaying it.\nSignor Pierotti gives a curious example of this trait of character. As\nhe was going to the Jordan, he found a dead Camel lying on the\nroadside, the head nearly separated from the body. On inquiry he found\nthat the animal had a master who ill-treated it, and had several times\ntried to bite him. One evening, after the Camels had been unloaded,\nthe drivers lay down to sleep as usual.\n\nThe Camel made its way to its master, and stamped on him as he slept.\nThe man uttered one startled cry, but had no time for another. The\ninfuriated Camel followed up its attack by grasping his throat in its\npowerful jaws, and shaking him to death. The whole scene passed so\nrapidly, that before the other drivers could come to the man's\nassistance he was hanging dead from the jaws of the Camel, who was\nshaking him as a dog shakes a rat, and would not release its victim\nuntil its head had been nearly severed from its body by sword-cuts.\n\nA similar anecdote is told by Mr. Palgrave, in his \"Central and\nEastern Arabia:\"--\n\n\"One passion alone he possesses, namely, revenge, of which he gives\nmany a hideous example; while, in carrying it out, he shows an\nunexpected degree of forethoughted malice, united meanwhile with all\nthe cold stupidity of his usual character. One instance of this I well\nremember--it occurred hard by a small town in the plain of Baalbec,\nwhere I was at the time residing.\n\n\"A lad of about fourteen had conducted a large camel, laden with wood,\nfrom that very village to another at half an hour's distance or so. As\nthe animal loitered or turned out of the way, its conductor struck it\nrepeatedly, and harder than it seems to have thought he had a right to\ndo. But, not finding the occasion favourable for taking immediate\nquits, it 'bided its time,' nor was that time long in coming.\n\n\"A few days later, the same lad had to re-conduct the beast, but\nunladen, to his own village. When they were about half way on the\nroad, and at some distance from any habitation, the camel suddenly\nstopped, looked deliberately round in every direction to assure itself\nthat no one was in sight, and, finding the road clear of passers-by,\nmade a step forward, seized the unlucky boy's head in its monstrous\nmouth, and, lifting him up in the air, flung him down again on the\nearth, with the upper part of his head completely torn off, and his\nbrains scattered on the ground. Having thus satisfied its revenge, the\nbrute quietly resumed its pace towards the village, as though nothing\nwere the matter, till some men, who had observed the whole, though\nunfortunately at too great a distance to be able to afford timely\nhelp, came up and killed it.\n\n\"Indeed, so marked is this unamiable propensity, that some\nphilosophers have ascribed the revengeful character of the Arabs to\nthe great share which the flesh and milk of the camel have in their\nsustenance, and which are supposed to communicate, to those who\npartake of them over-largely, the moral or immoral qualities of the\nanimal to which they belonged. I do not feel myself capable of\npronouncing an opinion on so intricate a question, but thus much I can\nsay, that the camel and its Bedouin master do afford so many and such\ndivers points of resemblance, that I do not think our Arab of Shomer\nfar in the wrong, when I once on a time heard him say, 'God created\nthe Bedouin for the camel, and the camel for the Bedouin.'\"\n\nThe reader will observe that Mr. Palgrave in this anecdote makes\nreference to the stupidity of the Camel. There is no doubt that the\nCamel is by no means an intellectual animal; but it is very possible\nthat its stupidity may in a great measure be owing to the fact that no\none has tried to cultivate its intellectual powers. The preceding\nanecdotes show clearly that the Camel must possess a strong memory,\nand be capable of exercising considerable ingenuity.\n\nStill it is not a clever animal. If its master should fall off its\nback, it never dreams of stopping, as a well-trained horse would do,\nbut proceeds at the same plodding pace, leaving his master to catch it\nif he can. Should it turn out of the way to crop some green\nthorn-bush, it will go on in the same direction, never thinking of\nturning back into the right road unless directed by its rider. Should\nthe Camel stray, \"it is a thousand to one that he will never find his\nway back to his accustomed home or pasture, and the first man who\npicks him up will have no particular shyness to get over; ... and the\nlosing of his old master and of his former cameline companions gives\nhim no regret, and occasions no endeavour to find them again.\"\n\nHe has the strongest objection to being laden at all, no matter how\nlight may be the burden, and expresses his disapprobation by growling\nand groaning, and attempting to bite. So habitual is this conduct that\nif a kneeling Camel be only approached, and a stone as large as a\nwalnut laid on its back, it begins to remonstrate in its usual manner,\ngroaning as if it were crushed to the earth with its load.\n\nThe Camel never makes way for any one, its instinct leading it to plod\nonward in its direct course. What may have been its habits in a state\nof nature no one can tell, for such a phenomenon as a wild Camel has\nnever been known in the memory of man. There are wild oxen, wild\ngoats, wild sheep, wild horses, and wild asses, but there is no spot\non the face of the earth where the Camel is found except as the\nservant of man. Through innate stupidity, according to Mr. Palgrave,\nit goes straight forwards in the direction to which its head happens\nto be pointed, and is too foolish even to think of stopping unless it\nhears the signal for halt.\n\nAs it passes through the narrow streets of an Oriental city, laden\nwith goods that project on either side, and nearly fill up the\nthoroughfare, it causes singular inconvenience, forcing every one who\nis in front of it to press himself closely to the wall, and to make\nway for the enormous beast as it plods along. The driver or rider\ngenerally gives notice by continually calling to the pedestrians to\nget out of the way, but a laden Camel rarely passes through a long\nstreet without having knocked down a man or two, or driven before it a\nfew riders on asses who cannot pass between the Camel and the wall.\n\nOne source of danger to its rider is to be found in the low archways\nwhich span so many of the streets. They are just high enough to permit\na laden Camel to pass under them, but are so low that they leave no\nroom for a rider. The natives, who are accustomed to this style of\narchitecture, are always ready for an archway, and, when the rider\nsees an archway which will not allow him to retain his seat, he slips\nto the ground, and remounts on the other side of the obstacle.\n\nMr. Kennard had a very narrow escape with one of these archways. \"I\nhad passed beneath one or two in perfect safety, without being obliged\nto do more than just bend my head forward, and was in the act of\nconversing with one of my companions behind, and was therefore in a\nhappy state of ignorance as to what was immediately before me, when\nthe shouting and running together of the people in the street on\neither side made me turn my head quickly, but only just in time to\nfeel my breath thrown back on my face against the keystone of a\ngateway, beneath which my camel, with too much way on him to be\nstopped immediately, had already commenced to pass.\n\n\"With a sort of feeling that it was all over with me, I threw myself\nback as far as I could, and was carried through in an almost\nbreathless state, my shirt-studs actually scraping along against the\nstonework. On emerging again into the open street, I could hardly\nrealize my escape, for if there had been a single projecting stone to\nstop my progress, the camel would have struggled to get free, and my\nchest must have been crushed in.\"\n\nIt will be seen from these instances that the charge of stupidity is\nnot an undeserved one. Still the animal has enough intellect to\nreceive all the education which it needs for the service of man, and\nwhich it receives at a very early age. The ordinary Camel of burden is\nmerely taught to follow its conductor, to obey the various words and\ngestures of command, and to endure a load. The Deloul, however, is\nmore carefully trained. It is allowed to follow its mother for a whole\nyear in perfect liberty. Towards the expiration of that time the young\nanimal is gradually stinted in its supply of milk, and forced to\nbrowse for its nourishment. On the anniversary of its birth, the young\nDeloul is turned with its head towards Canopus, and its ears solemnly\nboxed, its master saying at the same time, \"Henceforth drinkest thou\nno drop of milk.\" For this reason the newly-weaned Camel is called\nLathim, or the \"ear-boxed.\" It is then prevented from sucking by a\nsimple though cruel experiment. A wooden peg is sharpened at both\nends, and one end thrust into the young animal's nose. When it tries\nto suck, it pricks its mother with the projecting end, and at the same\ntime forces the other end more deeply into the wound, so that the\nmother drives away her offspring, and the young soon ceases to make\nthe attempt.\n\nThe food of the Camel is very simple, being, in fact, anything that it\ncan get. As it proceeds on its journey, it manages to browse as it\ngoes along, bending its long neck to the ground, and cropping the\nscanty herbage without a pause. Camels have been known to travel for\ntwenty successive days, passing over some eight hundred miles of\nground, without receiving any food except that which they gathered for\nthemselves by the way. The favourite food of the Camel is a shrub\ncalled the ghada, growing to six feet or so in height, and forming a\nfeathery tuft of innumerable little green twigs, very slender and\nflexible. It is so fond of this shrub that a Camel can scarcely ever\npass a bush without turning aside to crop it; and even though it be\nbeaten severely for its misconduct, it will repeat the process at the\nnext shrub that comes in sight.\n\nIt also feeds abundantly on the thorn-bushes which grow so plentifully\nin that part of the world; and though the thorns are an inch or two in\nlength, very strong, and as sharp as needles, the hard, horny palate\nof the animal enables it to devour them with perfect ease.\n\nThere are several species of these thorn-shrubs, which are scattered\nprofusely over the ground, and are, in fact, the commonest growth of\nthe place. After they die, being under the fierce sun of that climate,\nthey dry up so completely, that if a light be set to them they blaze\nup in a moment, with a sharp cracking sound and a roar of flame, and\nin a moment or two are nothing but a heap of light ashes. No wonder\nwas it that when Moses saw the thorn-bush burning without being\nconsumed he was struck with awe at the miracle. These withered bushes\nare the common fuel of the desert, giving out a fierce but brief heat,\nand then suddenly sinking into ashes. \"For as the crackling of thorns\nunder a pot, so is the laughter of the fool\" (Eccl. vii. 6).\n\nThe dried and withered twigs of these bushes are also eaten by the\nCamel, which seems to have a power of extracting nutriment from every\nsort of vegetable substance. It has been fed on charcoal, and, as has\nbeen happily remarked, could thrive on the shavings of a carpenter's\nworkshop.\n\nStill, when food is plentiful, it is fed as regularly as can be\nmanaged, and generally after a rather peculiar manner. \"Our guide,\"\nwrites Mr. Hamilton, in the work which has already been mentioned, \"is\nan elderly man, the least uncouth of our camel-drivers. He has three\ncamels in the caravan, and it was amusing to see his preparations for\ntheir evening's entertainment. The table-cloth, a circular piece of\nleather, was duly spread on the ground; on this he poured the quantity\nof dourrah destined for their meal, and calling his camels, they came\nand took each its place at the feast. It is quaint to see how each in\nhis turn eats, so gravely and so quietly, stretching his long neck\ninto the middle of the heap, then raising his head to masticate each\nmouthful; all so slowly and with such gusto, that we could swear it\nwas a party of epicures sitting in judgment on one of Vachette's\n_chefs d'oeuvre_.\"\n\nThe foregoing passages will show the reader how wonderfully adapted is\nthe constitution of the Camel for the country in which it lives, and\nhow indispensable it is to the inhabitants. It has been called \"the\nship of the desert,\" for without the Camel the desert would be as\nimpassable as the sea without ships. No water being found for several\ndays' journey together, the animal is able to carry within itself a\nsupply of water which will last it for several days, and, as no green\nthing grows far from the presence of water, the Camel is able to feed\nupon the brief-lived thorn-shrubs which have sprung up and died, and\nwhich, from their hard and sharp prickles, are safe from every animal\nexcept the hard-mouthed Camel.\n\nBut these advantages would be useless without another--i.e. the foot.\nThe mixed stones and sand of the desert would ruin the feet of almost\nany animal, and it is necessary that the Camel should be furnished\nwith a foot that cannot be split by heat like the hoof of a horse,\nthat is broad enough to prevent the creature from sinking into the\nsand, and is tough enough to withstand the action of the rough and\nburning soil.\n\nSuch a foot does the Camel possess. It consists of two long toes\nresting upon a hard elastic cushion with a tough and horny sole. This\ncushion is so soft that the tread of the huge animal is as noiseless\nas that of a cat, and, owing to the division of the toes, it spreads\nas the weight comes upon it, and thus gives a firm footing on loose\nground. The foot of the moose-deer has a similar property, in order to\nenable the animal to walk upon the snow.\n\nIn consequence of this structure, the Camel sinks less deeply into the\nground than any other animal; but yet it does sink in it, and dislikes\na deep and loose sand, groaning at every step, and being wearied by\nthe exertion of dragging its hard foot out of the holes into which\nthey sink. It is popularly thought that hills are impracticable to the\nCamel; but it is able to climb even rocky ground from which a horse\nwould recoil. Mr. Marsh, an American traveller, was much surprised by\nseeing a caravan of fifty camels pass over a long ascent in Arabia\nPetr\u00e6a. The rock was as smooth as polished marble, and the angle was\non an average fifteen degrees; but the whole caravan passed over it\nwithout an accident.\n\nThe soil that a Camel most hates is a wet and muddy ground, on which\nit is nearly sure to slip. If the reader will look at a Camel from\nbehind, he will see that the hinder legs are close together until the\nankle-joint, when they separate so widely that the feet are set on the\nground at a considerable distance from each other. On dry ground this\nstructure increases the stability of the animal by increasing its\nbase; but on wet ground the effect is singularly unpleasant. The soft,\npadded feet have no hold, and slip sideways at every step, often with\nsuch violence as to dislocate a joint and cause the death of the\nanimal. When such ground has to be traversed, the driver generally\npasses a bandage round the hind legs just below the ankle-joint, so as\nto prevent them from diverging too far.\n\nIt must be remarked, however, that the country in which the animal\nlives is essentially a dry one, and that moist and muddy ground is so\nexceptional that the generality of Camels never see it in their lives.\nCamels do not object to mud an inch or two deep, provided that there\nis firm ground below; and they have been seen to walk with confident\nsafety over pavements covered with mud and half-frozen snow.\n\nThe animals can ford rivers well enough, provided that the bed be\nstony or gravelly; but they are bad swimmers, their round bodies and\nlong necks being scarcely balanced by their legs, so that they are apt\nto roll over on their sides, and in such a case they are sure to be\ndrowned. When swimming is a necessity, the head is generally tied to\nthe stern of a boat, or guided by the driver swimming in front, while\nanother often clings to the tail, so as to depress the rump and\nelevate the head. It is rather curious that the Camels of the Sahara\ncannot be safely entrusted to the water. They will swim the river\nreadily enough; but they are apt to be seized with illness afterwards,\nand to die in a few hours.\n\nWe now come to some other uses of the Camel.\n\nIts hair is of the greatest importance, as it is used for many\npurposes. In this country, all that we know practically of the Camel's\nhair is that it is employed in making brushes for painters; but in its\nown land the hair plays a really important part. At the proper season\nit is removed from the animal, usually by being pulled away in tufts,\nbut sometimes by being shorn like the wool of sheep, and it is then\nspun by the women into strong thread.\n\nFrom this thread are made sundry fabrics where strength is required\nand coarseness is not an objection. The \"black tents\" of the Bedouin\nArabs, similar to those in which Abraham lived, are made of Camel's\nhair, and so are the rugs, carpets, and cordage used by the nomad\ntribes. Even mantles for rainy or cold weather are made of Camel's\nhair, and it was in a dress of this coarse and rough material that St.\nJohn the Baptist was clad. The best part of the Camel's hair is that\nwhich grows in tufts on the back and about the hump, the fibre being\nmuch longer than that which covers the body. There is also a little\nvery fine under-wool which is carefully gathered, and, when a\nsufficient quantity is procured, it is spun and woven into garments.\nShawls of this material are even now as valuable as those which are\nmade from the Cachmire goat.\n\nThe skin of the Camel is made into a sort of leather. It is simply\ntanned by being pegged out in the sun and rubbed with salt.\n\nSandals and leggings are made of this leather, and in some places\nwater-bottles are manufactured from it, the leather being thicker and\nless porous than that of the goat, and therefore wasting less of the\nwater by evaporation. The bones are utilized, being made into various\narticles of commerce.\n\nSo universally valuable is the Camel that even its dung is important\nto its owners. Owing to the substances on which the animal feeds, it\nconsists of little but macerated fragments of aromatic shrubs. It is\nmuch used as poultices in case of bruises or rheumatic pains, and is\neven applied with some success to simple fractures. It is largely\nemployed for fuel, and the desert couriers use nothing else, their\nCamels being furnished with a net, so that none of this useful\nsubstance shall be lost. For this purpose it is carefully collected,\nmixed with bits of straw, and made into little rolls, which are dried\nin the sun, and can then be laid by for any time until they are\nneeded.\n\nMixed with clay and straw, it is most valuable as a kind of mortar or\ncement with which the walls of huts are rendered weather-proof, and\nthe same material is used in the better-class houses to make a sort of\nterrace on the flat roof. This must be waterproof in order to\nwithstand the wet of the rainy season, and no material answers the\npurpose so well as that which has been mentioned. So strangely hard\nand firm is this composition, that stoves are made of it. These stoves\nare made like jars, and have the faculty of resisting the power of the\ninclosed fire. Even after it is burned it has its uses, the ashes\nbeing employed in the manufacture of sal-ammoniac.\n\n\nThere are two passages in the New Testament which mention the Camel in\nan allegorical sense. The first of these is the proverbial saying of\nour Lord, \"A rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.\nAgain I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye\nof a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God\"\n(Matt. xix. 23, 24).\n\nNow, this well-known but scarcely understood passage requires some\nlittle dissection. If the reader will refer to the context, he will\nsee that this saying was spoken in allusion to the young and wealthy\nman who desired to be one of the disciples, but clung too tightly to\nhis wealth to accept the only conditions on which he could be\nreceived. His possessions were a snare to him, as was proved by his\nrefusal to part with them at Christ's command. On his retiring, the\nexpression was used, \"that a rich man shall hardly (or, with\ndifficulty) enter the kingdom of heaven,\" followed by the simile of\nthe Camel and the needle's eye.\n\nNow, if we are to take this passage literally, we can but draw one\nconclusion from it, that a rich man can no more enter heaven than a\ncamel pass through the eye of a needle, _i.e._ that it is impossible\nfor him to do so. Whereas, in the previous sentence, Christ says not\nthat it is impossible, but difficult ([Greek: dyskol\u00f4s]) for him to do\nso. It is difficult for a man to use his money for the service of God,\nthe only purpose for which it was given him, and the difficulty\nincreases in proportion to its amount. But wealth in itself is no more\na bar to heaven than intellect, health, strength, or any other gift,\nand, if it be rightly used, is one of the most powerful tools that can\nbe used in the service of God. Our Lord did not condemn all wealthy\nmen alike. He knew many; but there was only one whom He advised to\nsell his possessions and give them to the poor as the condition of\nbeing admitted among the disciples.\n\n [Illustration: CAMEL GOING THROUGH A \"NEEDLE'S EYE.\"\n\n \"_It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for\n a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God._\"--MATT. xix. 24.]\n\nWe will now turn to the metaphor of the Camel and the needle's eye. Of\ncourse it can be taken merely as a very bold metaphor, but it may also\nbe understood in a simpler sense, the sense in which it was probably\nunderstood by those who heard it. In Oriental cities, there are in the\nlarge gates small and very low apertures called metaphorically\n\"needle's-eyes,\" just as we talk of certain windows as \"bull's-eyes.\"\nThese entrances are too narrow for a Camel to pass through them in the\nordinary manner, or even if loaded. When a laden Camel has to pass\nthrough one of these entrances, it kneels down, its load is removed,\nand then it shuffles through on its knees. \"Yesterday,\" writes Lady\nDuff-Gordon from Cairo, \"I saw a camel go through the eye of a needle,\n_i.e._ the low-arched door of an enclosure. He must kneel, and bow his\nhead to creep through; and thus the rich man must humble himself.\"\n\nThere is another passage in which the Camel is used by our Lord in a\nmetaphorical sense. This is the well-known sentence: \"Ye blind guides,\nwhich strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel\" (Matt. xxiii. 24). It is\nremarkable that an accidental misprint has robbed this passage of its\ntrue force. The real translation is: \"which strain _out_ the gnat, and\nswallow the camel.\" The Greek word is [Greek: diuliz\u00f4], which\nsignifies to filter thoroughly; and the allusion is made to the\npharisaical custom of filtering liquids before drinking them, lest by\nchance a gnat or some such insect which was forbidden as food might be\naccidentally swallowed.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BACTRIAN CAMEL.\n\n General description of the animal--Its use in mountain\n roads--Peculiar formation of the foot--Uses of a mixed\n breed--Its power of enduring cold--Used chiefly as a beast of\n draught--Unfitness for the plough--The cart and mode of\n harnessing--The load which it can draw--Camel-skin ropes--A\n Rabbinical legend.\n\n\nThe second kind of Camel--namely, the Bactrian species--was probably\nunknown to the Jews until a comparatively late portion of their\nhistory. This species was employed by the Assyrians, as we find by the\nsculptures upon the ruins, and if in no other way the Jews would\nbecome acquainted with them through the nation by whom they were\nconquered, and in whose land they abode for so long.\n\nThe Bactrian Camel is at once to be distinguished from that which has\nalready been described by the two humps and the clumsier and sturdier\nform. Still the skeletons of the Bactrian and Arabian species are so\nsimilar that none but a very skilful anatomist can distinguish between\nthem, and several learned zoologists have expressed an opinion, in\nwhich I entirely coincide, that the Bactrian and Arabian Camels are\nbut simple varieties of one and the same species, not nearly so\ndissimilar as the greyhound and the bulldog.\n\nUnlike the one-humped Camel, the Bactrian species is quite at home in\na cold climate, and walks over ice as easily as its congener does over\nsmooth stone. It is an admirable rock-climber, and is said even to\nsurpass the mule in the sureness of its tread. This quality is\nprobably occasioned by the peculiar structure of the foot, which has\nan elongated toe projecting beyond the soft pad, and forming a sort of\nclaw. In the winter time the riders much prefer them to horses,\nbecause their long legs enable them to walk easily through snow, in\nwhich a horse could only plunge helplessly, and would in all\nprobability sink and perish.\n\nA mixed breed of the one-humped and the Bactrian animals is thought to\nbe the best for hill work in winter time, and General Harlan actually\ntook two thousand of these animals in winter time for a distance of\nthree hundred and sixty miles over the snowy tops of the Indian\nCaucasus; and though the campaign lasted for seven months, he only\nlost one Camel, and that was accidentally killed. Owing to its use\namong the hills, the Bactrian species is sometimes called the Mountain\nCamel.\n\nIt very much dislikes the commencement of spring, because the warm\nmid-day sun slightly melts the surface of the snow, and the frost of\nnight converts it into a thin plate of ice. When the Camel walks upon\nthis semi-frozen snow, its feet plunge into the soft substratum\nthrough the icy crust, against which its legs are severely cut. The\nbeginning of the winter is liable to the same objection.\n\nThe mixed breed which has just been mentioned must be procured from a\nmale Bactrian and a female Arabian Camel. If the parentage be\nreversed, the offspring is useless, being weak, ill-tempered, and\ndisobedient.\n\nThe Bactrian Camel is, as has been mentioned, tolerant of cold, and is\nindeed so hardy an animal that it bears the severest winters without\nseeming to suffer distress, and has been seen quietly feeding when the\nthermometer has reached a temperature several degrees below zero.\nSometimes, when the cold is more than usually sharp, the owners sew a\nthick cloth round its body, but even in such extreme cases the animal\nis left to find its own food as it best can. And, however severe the\nweather may be, the Bactrian Camel never sleeps under a roof.\n\nThis Camel is sometimes employed as a beast of burden, but its general\nuse is for draught. It is not used for the plough, because it has an\nuncertain and jerking mode of pulling, and does not possess the steady\ndragging movement which is obtained by the use of the horse or ox.\n\n [Illustration: BACTRIAN CAMEL.\n\n \"_He saw a chariot of camels._\"--ISAIAH xxi. 7.]\n\nIt is almost invariably harnessed to carts, and always in pairs. The\nmode of yoking the animals is as simple as can well be conceived. A\npole runs between them from the front of the vehicle, and the Camels\nare attached to it by means of a pole which passes over their necks.\nOxen were harnessed in a similar manner. It was probably one of these\ncars or chariots that was mentioned by Isaiah in his prophecy\nrespecting Assyria:--\"And he saw a chariot with a couple of horsemen,\na chariot of asses, and a chariot of camels\" (Isa. xxi. 7). The cars\nthemselves are as simple as the mode of harnessing them, being almost\nexactly like the ox carts which have already been described.\n\nThe weight which can be drawn by a pair of these Camels is really\nconsiderable. On a tolerably made road a good pair of Camels are\nexpected to draw from twenty-six to twenty-eight hundred weight, and\nto continue their labours for twenty or thirty successive days,\ntraversing each day an average of thirty miles. It is much slower than\nthe Arabian Camel, seldom going at more than two and a half miles per\nhour. If, however, the vehicle to which a pair of Bactrians are\nharnessed were well made, the wheels truly circular, and the axles\nkept greased so as to diminish the friction, there is no doubt that\nthe animals could draw a still greater load to longer distances, and\nwith less trouble to themselves. As it is, the wheels are wretchedly\nfitted, and their ungreased axles keep up a continual creaking that is\nmost painful to an unaccustomed ear, and totally unheeded by the\ndrivers.\n\nThe hair of the Bactrian Camel is long, coarse, and strong; and, like\nthat of the Arabian animal, is made into rough cloth. It is plucked\noff by hand in the summer time, when it naturally becomes loose in\nreadiness for its annual renewal, and the weight of the entire crop of\nhair ought to be about ten pounds. The skin is not much valued, and is\nseldom used for any purpose except for making ropes, straps, and\nthongs, and is not thought worth the trouble of tanning. The milk,\nlike that of the Arabian animal, is much used for food, but the\nquantity is very trifling, barely two quarts per diem being procured\nfrom each Camel.\n\nThere is but little that is generally interesting in the Rabbinical\nwriters on the Camel. They have one proverbial saying upon the\nshortness of its ears. When any one makes a request that is likely to\nbe refused, they quote the instance of the Camel, who, it seems, was\ndissatisfied with its appearance, and asked for horns to match its\nlong ears. The result of the request was, that it was deprived of its\nears, and got no horns.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HORSE.\n\n The Hebrew words which signify the Horse--The Horse introduced\n into Palestine from Egypt--Similarity of the war-horse of\n Scripture and the Arab horse of the present day--Characteristics\n of the Horse--Courage and endurance of the Horse--Hardness of\n its unshod hoofs--Love of the Arab for his Horse--Difficulty of\n purchasing the animal--The Horse prohibited to the\n Israelites--Solomon's disregard of the edict--The war-chariot,\n its form and use--Probable construction of the iron chariot--The\n cavalry Horse--Lack of personal interest in the animal.\n\n\nSeveral Hebrew words are used by the various Scriptural writers to\nsignify the Horse, and, like our own terms of horse, mare, pony,\ncharger, &c., are used to express the different qualities of the\nanimal. The chief distinction of the Horse seemed to lie in its use\nfor riding or driving, the larger and heavier animals being naturally\nrequired for drawing the weighty springless chariots. The chariot\nhorse was represented by the word Sus, and the cavalry horse by the\nword _Parash_, and in several passages both these words occur in bold\ncontrast to each other. See, for example, 1 Kings iv. 26, &c.\n\n\nAmong the many passages of Scripture in which the Horse is mentioned,\nthere are few which do not treat of it as an adjunct of war, and\ntherefore it is chiefly in that light that we must regard it.\n\nThe Horse of the Scriptures was evidently a similar animal to the Arab\nHorse of the present day, as we find not only from internal evidence,\nbut from the sculptures and paintings which still remain to tell us of\nthe vanished glories of Egypt and Assyria. It is remarkable, by the\nway, that the first mention of the Horse in the Scriptures alludes to\nit as an Egyptian animal. During the terrible famine which Joseph had\nforetold, the Egyptians and the inhabitants of neighbouring countries\nwere unable to find food for themselves or fodder for their cattle,\nand, accordingly, they sold all their beasts for bread. \"And they\nbrought their cattle unto Joseph, and Joseph gave them bread in\nexchange for horses and the flocks, and for the cattle of herds, and\nfor the asses, and he fed them with bread for all their cattle for\nthat year.\"\n\nThis particular breed of Horses is peculiarly fitted for the purposes\nof war, and is much less apt for peaceful duties than the heavier and\nmore powerful breeds, which are found in different parts of the world.\nIt is remarkable for the flexible agility of its movements, which\nenable it to adapt itself to every movement of the rider, whose\nintentions it seems to divine by a sort of instinct, and who guides it\nnot so much by the bridle as by the pressure of the knees and the\nvoice. Examples of a similar mode of guidance may be seen on the\nwell-known frieze of the Parthenon, where, in the Procession of\nHorsemen, the riders may be seen directing their steeds by touching\nthe side of the neck with one finger, thus showing their own skill and\nthe well-trained quality of the animals which they ride.\n\nIts endurance is really wonderful, and a horse of the Kochlani breed\nwill go through an amount of work which is almost incredible. Even the\ntrial by which a Horse is tested is so severe, that any other animal\nwould be either killed on the spot or ruined for life. When a young\nmare is tried for the first time, her owner rides her for some fifty\nor sixty miles at full speed, always finishing by swimming her through\na river. After this trial she is expected to feed freely; and should\nshe refuse her food, she is rejected as an animal unworthy of the name\nof Kochlani.\n\nPartly from native qualities, and partly from constant association\nwith mankind, the Arab Horse is a singularly intelligent animal. In\nEurope we scarcely give the Horse credit for the sensitive\nintelligence with which it is endowed, and look upon it rather as a\nmachine for draught and carriage than a companion to man. The Arab,\nhowever, lives with his horse, and finds in it the docility and\nintelligence which we are accustomed to associate with the dog rather\nthan the Horse. It will follow him about and come at his call. It will\nstand for any length of time and await its rider without moving.\nShould he fall from its back, it will stop and stand patiently by him\nuntil he can remount; and there is a well-authenticated instance of an\nArab Horse whose master had been wounded in battle, taking him up by\nhis clothes and carrying him away to a place of safety.\n\nEven in the very heat and turmoil of the combat, the true Arab Horse\nseems to be in his true element, and fully deserves the splendid\neulogium in the Book of Job (xxxix. 19-25): \"Hast thou given the horse\nstrength? hast thou clothed his neck with thunder?\n\n\"Canst thou make him afraid as a grasshopper? the glory of his\nnostrils is terror.\n\n\"He paweth in the valley, and rejoiceth in his strength: he goeth on\nto meet the armed men.\n\n\"He mocketh at fear, and is not affrighted; neither turneth he back\nfrom the sword.\n\n\"The quiver rattleth against him, the glittering spear and the shield.\n\n\"He walketh the ground with fierceness and rage: neither believeth he\nthat it is the sound of the trumpet.\n\n\"He saith among the trumpets, Ha, ha; and he smelleth the battle afar\noff, the thunder of the captains, and the shouting.\"\n\nIn another passage an allusion is made to the courage of the Horse,\nand its love for the battle. \"I hearkened and heard, but they spake\nnot aright: no man repented him of his wickedness, saying, What have I\ndone? Every one turned to his course, as the horse rusheth into the\nbattle.\" (Jer. viii. 6.) Even in the mimic battle of the djereed the\nHorse seems to exult in the conflict as much as his rider, and wheels\nor halts almost without the slightest intimation.\n\nThe hoofs of the Arab Horses are never shod, their owners thinking\nthat that act is not likely to improve nature, and even among the\nburning sands and hard rocks the Horse treads with unbroken hoof. In\nsuch a climate, indeed, an iron shoe would be worse than useless, as\nit would only scorch the hoof by day, and in consequence of the rapid\nchange of temperature by day or night, the continual expansion and\ncontraction of the metal would soon work the nails loose, and cause\nthe shoe to fall off.\n\n [Illustration: WAR HORSE.\n\n \"He saith among the trumpets, Ha, Ha; and he smelleth the battle afar\n off, the thunder of the captains and the shouting.\"--JOB xxxix. 25.]\n\nA tender-footed Horse would be of little value, and so we often find\nin the Scriptures that the hardness of the hoof is reckoned among one\nof the best qualities of a Horse. See, for example, Isa. v. 28:\n\"Whose arrows are sharp, and all their bows bent, their horses'\nhoofs shall be counted like flint, and their wheels like a\nwhirlwind.\" Again, in Micah iv. 13: \"Arise and thresh, O daughter of\nZion: for I will make thine horn iron, and I will make thy hoofs\nbrass: and thou shalt beat in pieces many people.\" Allusion is here\nmade to one mode of threshing, in which a number of Horses were turned\ninto the threshing-floor, and driven about at random among the wheat,\ninstead of walking steadily like the oxen.\n\nIn Judges v. 22 there is a curious allusion to the hoofs of the Horse.\nIt occurs in the Psalm of Thanksgiving sung by Deborah and Barak after\nthe death of Sisera: \"Then were the horse-hoofs broken by the means of\nthe prancings, the prancings of their mighty ones.\" It is easy now to\nsee that these words infer a scornful allusion to the inferiority of\nthe enemy's Horses, inasmuch as the hoofs of the best Horses would be\n\"counted as flint,\" and would not be broken by the prancings.\n\nHorses possessed of the qualities of courage, endurance, and sureness\nof foot are naturally invaluable; and even at the present day the Arab\nwarrior esteems above all things a Horse of the purest breed, and,\nwhether he buys or sells one, takes care to have its genealogy made\nout and hung on the animal's neck.\n\nAs to the mare, scarcely any inducement is strong enough to make an\nArab part with it, even to a countryman, and the sale of the animal is\nhindered by a number of impediments which in point of fact are almost\nprohibitory. Signor Pierotti, whose long residence in Palestine has\ngiven him a deep insight into the character of the people, speaks in\nthe most glowing terms of the pure Arab Horse, and of its inestimable\nvalue to its owner. Of the difficulties with which the sale of the\nanimal is surrounded, he gives a very amusing account:--\n\n\"After this enumeration of the merits of the horse, I will describe\nthe manner in which a sale is conducted, choosing the case of the\nmare, as that is the more valuable animal. The price varies with the\npurity of blood of the steed, and the fortunes of its owner. When he\nis requested to fix a value, his first reply is, 'It is yours, and\nbelongs to you, I am your servant;' because, perhaps, he does not\nthink that the question is asked with any real design of purchasing;\nwhen the demand is repeated, he either makes no answer or puts the\nquestion by; at the third demand he generally responds rudely with a\nsardonic smile, which is not a pleasant thing to see, as it is a sign\nof anger; and then says that he would sooner sell his family than his\nmare. This remark is not meant as a mere jest; for it is no uncommon\nthing for a Bedawy to give his parents as hostages rather than\nseparate himself from his friend.\n\n\"If, however, owing to some misfortune, he determines on selling his\nmare, it is very doubtful whether he or his parents will allow her to\nleave their country without taking the precaution to render her unfit\nfor breeding.\n\n\"There are many methods of arranging the sale, all of which I should\nlike to describe particularly; however, I will confine myself to a\ngeneral statement. Before the purchaser enters upon the question of\nthe price to be paid, he must ascertain that the parents, friends, and\nallies of the owners give their consent to the sale, without which\nsome difficulty or other may arise, or perhaps the mare may be stolen\nfrom her new master. He must also obtain an unquestionable warranty\nthat she is fit for breeding purposes, and that no other has a prior\nclaim to any part of her body. This last precaution may seem rather\nstrange, but it arises from the following custom. It sometimes happens\nthat, when a Bedawy is greatly in want of money, he raises it most\neasily by selling a member of his horse; so that very frequently a\nhorse belongs to a number of owners, one of whom has purchased the\nright fore-leg, another the left, another the hind-leg, or the tail,\nor an ear, or the like; and the proprietors have each a proportionate\ninterest in the profits of its labour or sale.\n\n\"So also the offspring are sold in a similar manner; sometimes only\nthe first-born, sometimes the first three; and then it occasionally\nhappens that two or three members of the foal are, as it were,\nmortgaged. Consequently, any one who is ignorant of this custom may\nfind that, after he has paid the price of the mare to her supposed\nowner, a third person arises who demands to be paid the value of his\npart; and, if the purchaser refuse to comply, he may find himself in a\nvery unpleasant situation, without any possibility of obtaining help\nfrom the local government. Whoever sells his mare entirely, without\nreserving to himself one or two parts, must be on good terms with the\nconfederate chiefs in the neighbourhood, and must have obtained their\nformal sanction, otherwise they would universally despise him, and\nperhaps lie in wait to kill him, so that his only hope of escape would\nbe a disgraceful flight, just as if he had committed some great\ncrime. It is an easier matter to purchase a stallion; but even in this\ncase the above formalities must be observed.\n\n\"These remarks only apply to buying horses of the purest blood; those\nof inferior race are obtained without difficulty, and at fair prices.\"\n\nFor some reason, perhaps the total severance of the Israelites from\nthe people among whom they had lived so long in captivity, the use of\nthe Horse, or, at all events, the breeding of it, was forbidden to the\nIsraelites; see Deut. xvi. 16. After prophesying that the Israelites,\nwhen they had settled themselves in the Promised Land, would want a\nking, the inspired writer next ordains that the new king must be\nchosen by Divine command, and must belong to one of the twelve tribes.\nHe then proceeds as follows:--\"But he shall not multiply horses to\nhimself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he\nshould multiply horses: forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto you, Ye\nshall henceforth return no more that way.\"\n\nThe foresight of this prophetical writer was afterwards shown by the\nfact that many kings of Israel did send to Egypt for Horses, Egypt\nbeing the chief source from which these animals were obtained. And,\njudging from the monuments to which reference has been made, the Horse\nof Egypt was precisely the same animal as the Arab Horse of the\npresent day, and was probably obtained from nomad breeders.\n\nIn spite of the prohibitory edict, both David and Solomon used Horses\nin battle, and the latter supplied himself largely from Egypt,\ndisregarding as utterly the interdict against plurality of Horses as\nthat against plurality of wives, which immediately follows.\n\nDavid seems to have been the first king who established a force of\nchariots, and this he evidently did for the purpose of action on the\nflat grounds of Palestine, where infantry were at a great disadvantage\nwhen attacked by the dreaded chariots; yet he did not controvert the\nlaw by multiplying to himself Horses, or even by importing them from\nEgypt; and when he had an opportunity of adding to his army an\nenormous force of chariots, he only employed as many as he thought\nwere sufficient for his purpose. After he defeated Hadadezer, and had\ntaken from him a thousand chariots with their Horses together with\nseven hundred cavalry, he houghed all the Horses except those which\nwere needed for one hundred chariots.\n\nSolomon, however, was more lax, and systematically broke the ancient\nlaw by multiplying Horses exceedingly, and sending to Egypt for them.\nWe learn from 1 Kings iv. 26 of the enormous establishment which he\nkept up both for chariots and cavalry. Besides those which were given\nto him as tribute, he purchased both chariots and their Horses from\nEgypt and Syria, the chariots being delivered at the rate of six\nhundred shekels of silver, and the Horses for an hundred and fifty\nshekels.\n\nChariots were far more valued in battle than horsemen, probably\nbecause their weight made their onset irresistible against infantry,\nwho had no better weapons than bows and spears. The slingers\nthemselves could make little impression on the chariots; and even if\nthe driver, or the warrior who fought in the chariot, or his\nattendant, happened to be killed, the weighty machine, with its two\nHorses, still went on its destructive way.\n\nOf their use in battle we find very early mention. For example, in\nExod. xiv. 6 it is mentioned that Pharaoh made ready his chariot to\npursue the Israelites; and in a subsequent part of the same chapter we\nfind that six hundred of the Egyptian chariot force accompanied their\nmaster in the pursuit, and that the whole army was delayed because the\nloss of the chariot wheels made them drive heavily.\n\nThen in the familiar story of Sisera and Jael the vanquished general\nis mentioned as alighting from his chariot, in which he would be\nconspicuous, and taking flight on foot; and, after his death, his\nmother is represented as awaiting his arrival, and saying to the women\nof the household, \"Why is his chariot so long in coming? Why tarry the\nwheels of his chariot?\"\n\nDuring the war of conquest which Joshua led, the chariot plays a\nsomewhat important part. As long as the war was carried on in the\nrugged mountainous parts of the land, no mention of the chariot is\nmade; but when the battles had to be fought on level ground, the enemy\nbrought the dreaded chariots to bear upon the Israelites. In spite of\nthese adjuncts, Joshua won the battles, and, unlike David, destroyed\nthe whole of the Horses and burned the chariots.\n\nMany years afterwards, a still more dreadful weapon, the iron chariot,\nwas used against the Israelites by Jabin. This new instrument of war\nseems to have cowed the people completely; for we find that by means\nof his nine hundred chariots of iron Jabin \"mightily oppressed the\nchildren of Israel\" for twenty years. It has been well suggested that\nthe possession of the war chariot gave rise to the saying of\nBenhadad's councillors, that the gods of Israel were gods of the\nhills, and so their army had been defeated; but that if the battle\nwere fought in the plain, where the chariots and Horses could act,\nthey would be victorious.\n\nSo dreaded were these weapons, even by those who were familiar with\nthem and were accustomed to use them, that when the Syrians had\nbesieged Samaria, and had nearly reduced it by starvation, the fancied\nsound of a host of chariots and Horses that they heard in the night\ncaused them all to flee and evacuate the camp, leaving their booty and\nall their property in the hands of the Israelites.\n\nWhether the Jews ever employed the terrible scythe chariots is not\nquite certain, though it is probable that they may have done so; and\nthis conjecture is strengthened by the fact that they were employed\nagainst the Jews by Antiochus, who had \"footmen an hundred and ten\nthousand, and horsemen five thousand and three hundred, and elephants\ntwo and twenty, and three hundred chariots armed with hooks\" (2 Macc.\nxiii. 2). Some commentators think that by the iron chariots mentioned\nabove were signified ordinary chariots armed with iron scythes\nprojecting from the sides.\n\nBy degrees the chariot came to be one of the recognised forces in war,\nand we find it mentioned throughout the books of the Scriptures, not\nonly in its literal sense, but as a metaphor which every one could\nunderstand. In the Psalms, for example, are several allusions to the\nwar-chariot. \"He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth; He\nbreaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder; He burneth the\nchariot in the fire\" (Ps. xlvi. 9). Again: \"At Thy rebuke, O God of\nJacob, both the chariot and horse are cast into a dead sleep\" (Ps.\nlxxvi. 6). And: \"Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we\nwill remember the name of the Lord our God\" (Ps. xx. 7). Now, the\nforce of these passages cannot be properly appreciated unless we\nrealize to ourselves the dread in which the war-chariot was held by\nthe foot-soldiers. Even cavalry were much feared; but the chariots\nwere objects of almost superstitious fear, and the rushing sound of\ntheir wheels, the noise of the Horses' hoofs, and the shaking of the\nground as the \"prancing horses and jumping chariots\" (Nab. iii. 2)\nthundered along, are repeatedly mentioned.\n\nSee, for example, Ezek. xxvi. 10: \"By reason of the abundance of his\nhorses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise\nof the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots.\" Also, Jer.\nxlvii. 3: \"At the noise of the stamping of the hoofs of his strong\nhorses, at the rushing of his chariots, and at the rumbling of his\nwheels, the fathers shall not look back to their children for\nfeebleness of hands.\" See also Joel ii. 4, 5: \"The appearance of them\nis as the appearance of horses; and as horsemen, so shall they run.\n\n\"Like the noise of chariots on the tops of mountains shall they leap,\nlike the noise of a flame of fire that devoureth the stubble, as a\nstrong people set in battle array.\"\n\nIn several passages the chariot and Horse are used in bold imagery as\nexpressions of Divine power: \"The chariots of God are twenty thousand,\neven thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the\nholy place\" (Ps. lxviii. 17). A similar image is employed in Ps. civ.\n3: \"Who maketh the clouds His chariot: who walketh upon the wings of\nthe wind.\" In connexion with these passages, we cannot but call to\nmind that wonderful day when the unseen power of the Almighty was made\nmanifest to the servant of Elisha, whose eyes were suddenly opened,\nand he saw that the mountain was full of Horses and chariots of fire\nround about Elisha.\n\nThe chariot and horses of fire by which Elijah was taken from earth\nare also familiar to us, and in connexion with the passage which\ndescribes that wonderful event, we may mention one which occurs in the\nsplendid prayer of Habakkuk (iii. 8): \"Was the Lord displeased against\nthe rivers? was Thine anger against the rivers? was Thy wrath against\nthe sea, that Thou didst ride upon Thine horses and Thy chariots of\nsalvation?\"\n\nBy degrees the chariot came to be used for peaceful purposes, and was\nemployed as our carriages of the present day, in carrying persons of\nwealth. That this was the case in Egypt from very early times is\nevident from Gen. xli. 43, in which we are told that after Pharaoh had\ntaken Joseph out of prison and raised him to be next in rank to\nhimself, the king caused him to ride in the second chariot which he\nhad, and so to be proclaimed ruler over Egypt. Many years afterwards\nwe find him travelling in his chariot to the land of Goshen, whither\nhe went to meet Jacob and to conduct him to the presence of Pharaoh.\n\nAt first the chariot seems to have been too valuable to the Israelites\nto have been used for any purpose except war, and it is not until a\ncomparatively late time that we find it employed as a carriage, and\neven then it is only used by the noble and wealthy. Absalom had such\nchariots, but it is evident that he used them for purposes of state,\nand as appendages of his regal rank. Chariots or carriages were,\nhowever, afterwards employed by the Israelites as freely as by the\nEgyptians, from whom they were originally procured; and accordingly we\nfind Rehoboam mounting his chariot and fleeing to Jerusalem, Ahab\nriding in his chariot from Samaria to Jezreel, with Elijah running\nbefore him; and in the New Testament we read of the chariot in which\nsat the chief eunuch of Ethiopia whom Philip baptized (Acts viii. 28).\n\nAs to the precise form and character of these chariots, they are made\nfamiliar to us by the sculptures and paintings of Egypt and Assyria,\nfrom both of which countries the Jews procured the vehicles. Differing\nvery slightly in shape, the principle of the chariot was the same; and\nit strikes us with some surprise that the Assyrians, the Egyptians,\nand the Jews, the three wealthiest and most powerful nations of the\nworld, should not have invented a better carriage. They lavished the\ncostliest materials and the most artistic skill in decorating the\nchariots, but had no idea of making them comfortable for the\noccupants.\n\nThey were nothing but semicircular boxes on wheels, and of very small\nsize. They were hung very low, so that the occupants could step in and\nout without trouble, though they do not seem to have had the sloping\nfloor of the Greek or Roman chariot. They had no springs, but, in\norder to render the jolting of the carriage less disagreeable, the\nfloor was made of a sort of network of leathern ropes, very tightly\nstretched so as to be elastic. The wheels were always two in number,\nand generally had six spokes.\n\nTo the side of the chariot was attached the case which contained the\nbow and quiver of arrows, and in the case of a rich man these\nbow-cases were covered with gold and silver, and adorned with figures\nof lions and other animals. Should the chariot be intended for two\npersons, two bow-cases were fastened to it, the one crossing the\nother. The spear had also its tubular case, in which it was kept\nupright, like the whip of a modern carriage.\n\nTwo Horses were generally used with each chariot, though three were\nsometimes employed. They were harnessed very simply, having no traces,\nand being attached to the central pole by a breast-band, a very slight\nsaddle, and a loose girth. On their heads were generally fixed\nornaments, such as tufts of feathers, and similar decorations, and\ntassels hung to the harness served to drive away the flies. Round the\nneck of each Horse passed a strap, to the end of which was attached a\nbell. This ornament is mentioned in Zech. xiv. 20: \"In that day shall\nthere be upon the bells of the horses, Holiness unto the Lord\"--_i.e._\nthe greeting of peace shall be on the bells of the animals once used\nin war.\n\nSometimes the owner drove his own chariot, even when going into\nbattle, but the usual plan was to have a driver, who managed the\nHorses while the owner or occupant could fight with both his hands at\nliberty. In case he drove his own Horse, the reins passed round his\nwaist, and the whip was fastened to the wrist by a thong, so that when\nthe charioteer used the bow, his principal weapon, he could do so\nwithout danger of losing his whip.\n\nThus much for the use of the chariot in war; we have now the Horse as\nthe animal ridden by the cavalry.\n\nAs was the case with the chariot, the war-horse was not employed by\nthe Jews until a comparatively late period of their history. They had\nbeen familiarized with cavalry during their long sojourn in Egypt, and\nin the course of their war of conquest had often suffered defeat from\nthe horsemen of the enemy. But we do not find any mention of a mounted\nforce as forming part of the Jewish army until the days of David,\nalthough after that time the successive kings possessed large forces\nof cavalry.\n\nMany references to mounted soldiers are made by the prophets,\nsometimes allegorically, sometimes metaphorically. See, for example,\nJer. vi. 23: \"They shall lay hold on bow and spear; they are cruel,\nand have no mercy; their voice roareth like the sea; and they ride\nupon horses, set in array as men for war against thee, O daughter of\nZion.\" The same prophet has a similar passage in chap. l. 42, couched\nin almost precisely the same words. And in chap. xlvi. 4, there is a\nfurther reference to the cavalry, which is specially valuable as\nmentioning the weapons used by them. The first call of the prophet is\nto the infantry: \"Order ye the buckler and shield, and draw near to\nbattle\" (verse 3); and then follows the command to the cavalry,\n\"Harness the horses; and get up, ye horsemen, and stand forth with\nyour helmets; furbish the spears, and put on the brigandines.\" The\nchief arms of the Jewish soldier were therefore the cuirass, the\nhelmet, and the lance, the weapons which in all ages, and in all\ncountries, have been found to be peculiarly suitable to the\nhorse-soldier.\n\n\nBeing desirous of affording the reader a pictorial representation of\nthe war and state chariots, I have selected Egypt as the typical\ncountry of the former, and Assyria of the latter. Both drawings have\nbeen executed with the greatest care in details, every one of which,\neven to the harness of the Horses, the mode of holding the reins, the\nform of the whip, and the offensive and defensive armour, has been\ncopied from the ancient records of Egypt and Nineveh.\n\nWe will first take the war-chariot of Egypt.\n\nThis form has been selected as the type of the war-chariot, because\nthe earliest account of such a force mentions the war-chariots of\nEgypt, and because, after the Israelites had adopted chariots as an\nacknowledged part of their army, the vehicles, as well as the trained\nHorses, and probably their occupants, were procured from Egypt.\n\nThe scene represents a battle between the imperial forces and a\nrevolted province, so that the reader may have the opportunity of\nseeing the various kinds of weapons and armour which were in use in\nEgypt at the time of Joseph. In the foreground is the chariot of the\ngeneral, driven at headlong speed, the Horses at full gallop, and the\nspringless chariot leaping off the ground as the Horses bound along.\nThe royal rank of the general in question is shown by the feather fan\nwhich denotes his high birth, and which is fixed in a socket at the\nback of his chariot, much as a coachman fixes his whip. The rank of\nthe rider is further shown by the feather plumes on the heads of his\nHorses.\n\n [Illustration: EGYPTIAN WAR-CHARIOTS.\n\n \"_Come up, ye horses; and rage, ye chariots; and let the mighty men\n come forth._\"--JER. xlvi. 9.\n\n \"_The noise of a whip, and the noise of the rattling of the wheels,\n and of the prancing horses, and of the jumping chariots._\"--NAHUM iii.\n 2.\n\n \"_Like the noise of chariots ... shall they leap._\"--JOEL ii. 5.]\n\nBy the side of the chariot are seen the quiver and bow-case, the\nformer being covered with decorations, and having the figure of a\nrecumbent lion along its sides. The simple but effective harness of\nthe Horses is especially worthy of notice, as showing how the ancients\nknew, better than the moderns, that to cover a Horse with a\ncomplicated apparatus of straps and metal only deteriorates from the\npowers of the animal, and that a Horse is more likely to behave well\nif he can see freely on all sides, than if all lateral vision be cut\noff by the use of blinkers.\n\nJust behind the general is the chariot of another officer, one of\nwhose Horses has been struck, and is lying struggling on the ground.\nThe general is hastily giving his orders as he dashes past the fallen\nanimal. On the ground are lying the bodies of some slain enemies, and\nthe Horses are snorting and shaking their heads, significative of\ntheir unwillingness to trample on a human being. By the side of the\ndead man are his shield, bow, and quiver, and it is worthy of notice\nthat the form of these weapons, as depicted upon the ancient Egyptian\nmonuments, is identical with that which is still found among several\nhalf-savage tribes of Africa.\n\nIn the background is seen the fight raging round the standards. One\nchief has been killed, and while the infantry are pressing round the\nbody of the rebel leader and his banner on one side, on the other the\nimperial chariots are thundering along to support the attack, and are\ndriving their enemies before them. In the distance are seen the clouds\nof dust whirled into the air by the hoofs and wheels, and circling in\nclouds by the eddies caused by the fierce rush of the vehicles, thus\nillustrating the passage in Jer. iv. 13: \"Behold, he shall come up as\nclouds, and his chariots shall be as a whirlwind: his horses are\nswifter than eagles. Woe unto us! for we are spoiled.\" The reader will\nsee, by reference to the illustration, how wonderfully true and\nforcible is this statement, the writer evidently having been an\neye-witness of the scene which he so powerfully depicts.\n\n\nThe second scene is intentionally chosen as affording a strong\ncontrast to the former. Here, instead of the furious rush, the\ngalloping Horses, the chariots leaping off the ground, the archers\nbending their bows, and all imbued with the fierce ardour of battle,\nwe have a scene of quiet grandeur, the Assyrian king making a solemn\nprogress in his chariot after a victory, accompanied by his\nattendants, and surrounded by his troops, in all the placid splendour\nof Eastern state.\n\nChief object in the illustration stands the great king in his chariot,\nwearing the regal crown, or mitre, and sheltered from the sun by the\numbrella, which in ancient Nineveh, as in more modern times, was the\nemblem of royalty. By his side is his charioteer, evidently a man of\nhigh rank, holding the reins in a business-like manner; and in front\nmarches the shield-bearer. In one of the sculptures from which this\nIllustration was composed, the shield-bearer was clearly a man of\nrank, fat, fussy, full of importance, and evidently a portrait of some\nwell-known individual.\n\n [Illustration: ASSYRIAN CHARIOT OF STATE.\n\n \"_Then shall there enter into the gates of this city kings and princes\n sitting upon the throne of David, riding in chariots._\"--JER. xvii.\n 25.]\n\nThe Horses are harnessed with remarkable lightness, but they bear the\ngorgeous trappings which befit the rank of the rider, their heads\nbeing decorated with the curious successive plumes with which the\nAssyrian princes distinguished their chariot Horses, and the\nbreast-straps being adorned with tassels, repeated in successive rows\nlike the plumes of the head.\n\nThe reader will probably notice the peculiar high action of the\nHorses. This accomplishment seems to have been even more valued among\nthe ancients than by ourselves, and some of the sculptures show the\nHorses with their knees almost touching their noses. Of course the\nartist exaggerated the effect that he wanted to produce; but the very\nfact of the exaggeration shows the value that was set on a high and\nshowy action in a Horse that was attached to a chariot of state. The\nold Assyrian sculptors knew the Horse well, and delineated it in a\nmost spirited and graphic style, though they treated it rather\nconventionally. The variety of attitude is really wonderful,\nconsidering that all the figures are profile views, as indeed seemed\nto have been a law of the historical sculptures.\n\n\nBefore closing this account of the Horse, it may be as well to remark\nthe singular absence of detail in the Scriptural accounts. Of the\nother domesticated animals many such details are given, but of the\nHorse we hear but little, except in connexion with war. There are few\nexceptions to this rule, and even the oft-quoted passage in Job, which\ngoes deeper into the character of the Horse than any other portion of\nthe Scriptures, only considers the Horse as an auxiliary in battle. We\nmiss the personal interest in the animal which distinguishes the many\nreferences to the ox, the sheep, and the goat; and it is remarkable\nthat even in the Book of Proverbs, which is so rich in references to\nvarious animals, very little is said of the Horse.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ASS.\n\n Importance of the Ass in the East--Its general use for the\n saddle--Riding the Ass not a mark of humility--The triumphal\n entry--White Asses--Character of the Scriptural Ass--Saddling\n the Ass--The Ass used in agriculture--The Ass's millstone--The\n water-wheel and the plough--Reminiscences of the Ass in the\n Scriptural narrative--Its value as property--The flesh of the\n Ass--The siege of Samaria and its horrors--Various legends\n respecting the Ass--The impostor and his fate--Samson and\n Balaam.\n\n\nIn the Scriptures we read of two breeds of Ass, namely, the\nDomesticated and the Wild Ass. As the former is the more important of\nthe two, we will give it precedence.\n\n\nIn the East, the Ass has always played a much more important part than\namong us Westerns, and on that account we find it so frequently\nmentioned in the Bible. In the first place, it is the universal\nsaddle-animal of the East. Among us the Ass has ceased to be regularly\nused for the purposes of the saddle, and is only casually employed by\nholiday-makers and the like. Some persons certainly ride it\nhabitually, but they almost invariably belong to the lower orders, and\nare content to ride without a saddle, balancing themselves in some\nextraordinary manner just over the animal's tail. In the East,\nhowever, it is ridden by persons of the highest rank, and is decorated\nwith saddle and harness as rich as those of the horse.\n\nIn England we should be very much surprised to see a royal prince, a\njudge, or a bishop travelling habitually on a donkey, but in Palestine\nit is just the animal which would be considered most appropriate for\nthe purpose. For example, we find that Abraham, an exceptionally\nwealthy man, and a chief of high position, made use of the Ass for the\nsaddle. It was on an Ass that he travelled when he made his three\ndays' journey from Beersheba to Moriah, when he was called to prove\nhis faith by sacrificing Isaac (see Gen. xxii. 3).\n\nThen in Judges x. 3, 4, we find that riding upon the Ass is actually\nmentioned as a mark of high rank.\n\n\"And after him arose Jair, a Gileadite, and judged Israel twenty and\ntwo years.\n\n\"And he had thirty sons that rode on thirty ass colts, and they had\nthirty cities, which are called Havoth-jair unto this day, which are in\nthe land of Gilead.\" So here we have the curious fact, that the sacred\nhistorian thinks it worth while to mention that great men, the sons of\nthe chief man of Israel, each of them being ruler over a city, rode upon\nAss colts. In the same book, xii. 13, 14, we have a similar record of\nAbdon, the judge who preceded Samson.\n\n\"After him Abdon the son of Hillel, a Pirathonite, judged Israel.\n\n\"And he had forty sons and thirty nephews\" (or grandsons according to\nsome translators) \"that rode on threescore and ten ass colts: and he\njudged Israel eight years.\"\n\nThus we see that, so far from the use of the Ass as a saddle-animal\nbeing a mark of humility, it ought to be viewed in precisely the\nopposite light. In consequence of the very natural habit of reading,\naccording to Western ideas, the Scriptures, which are books\nessentially Oriental in all their allusions and tone of thought, many\npersons have entirely perverted the sense of one very familiar\npassage, the prophecy of Zechariah concerning the future Messiah.\n\"Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem:\nbehold, thy King cometh unto thee: He is just, and having salvation;\nlowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass\"\n(Zech. ix. 9).\n\nNow this passage, as well as the one which describes its fulfilment so\nmany years afterwards, has often been seized upon as a proof of the\nmeekness and lowliness of our Saviour, in riding upon so humble an\nanimal when He made His entry into Jerusalem. The fact is, that there\nwas no humility in the case, neither was the act so understood by the\npeople. He rode upon an Ass as any prince or ruler would have done who\nwas engaged on a peaceful journey, the horse being reserved for war\npurposes. He rode on the Ass, and not on the horse, because He was the\nPrince of Peace and not of war, as indeed is shown very clearly in the\ncontext. For, after writing the words which have just been quoted,\nZechariah proceeds as follows (ver. 10): \"And I will cut off the\nchariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow\nshall be cut off: and He shall speak peace unto the heathen: and His\ndominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the\nends of the earth.\"\n\nMeek and lowly was He, as became the new character, hitherto unknown\nto the warlike and restless Jews, a Prince, not of war, as had been\nall other celebrated kings, but of peace. Had He come as the Jews\nexpected--despite so many prophecies--their Messiah to come, as a\ngreat king and conqueror, He might have ridden the war-horse, and been\nsurrounded with countless legions of armed men. But He came as the\nherald of peace, and not of war; and, though meek and lowly, yet a\nPrince, riding as became a prince, on an Ass colt which had borne no\ninferior burden.\n\nThat the act was not considered as one of lowliness is evident from\nthe manner in which it was received by the people, accepting Him as\nthe Son of David, coming in the name of the Highest, and greeting Him\nwith the cry of \"Hosanna!\" (\"Save us now,\") quoted from verses 25, 26\nof Ps. cxviii.: \"Save now, I beseech Thee, O Lord: O Lord, I beseech\nThee, send now prosperity.\"\n\n\"Blessed be He that cometh in the name of the Lord.\"\n\nThe palm-branches which they strewed upon the road were not chosen by\nthe attendant crowd merely as a means of doing honour to Him whom they\nacknowledged as the Son of David. They were necessarily connected with\nthe cry of \"Hosanna!\" At the Feast of Tabernacles, it was customary\nfor the people to assemble with branches of palms and willows in their\nhands, and for one of the priests to recite the Great Hallel, i.e. Ps.\ncxiii. and cxviii. At certain intervals, the people responded with the\ncry of \"Hosanna!\" waving at the same time their palm-branches. For the\nwhole of the seven days through which the feast lasted they repeated\ntheir Hosannas, always accompanying the shout with the waving of\npalm-branches, and setting them towards the altar as they went in\nprocession round it.\n\nEvery child who could hold a palm-branch was expected to take part in\nthe solemnity, just as did the children on the occasion of the\ntriumphal entry. By degrees, the name of Hosanna was transferred to\nthe palm-branches themselves, as well as to the feast, the last day\nbeing called the Great Hosanna.\n\nThe reader will now see the importance of this carrying of\npalm-branches, accompanied with Hosannas, and that those who used\nthem in honour of Him whom they followed into Jerusalem had no idea\nthat He was acting any lowly part.\n\nAgain, the action of the disciples in putting their mantles on the\nAss, and setting their Master upon them, was one that signified their\nacknowledgment of Him as their Prince; and the same idea was typified\nby the laying of the clothes upon the road, together with the\npalm-branches. Compare also the passage in 2 Kings ix. 13. When Elisha\nsent the young prophet to call Jehu from among the council, and to\nanoint him King of Israel, the act of anointing was performed in a\nprivate chamber. Jehu, scarcely realizing the import of the act,\nseemed to think it a trick played upon him by some of his companions,\nthe commanding officers of the army. When, however, they heard his\naccount of the interview with the prophet, they at once accepted him\nas their king, and, as token thereof, \"they hasted, and took every man\nhis garment, and put it under him at the top of the stairs, and blew\nwith trumpets, saying, Jehu is king.\"\n\nWhite Asses were selected for persons of high rank, especially for\nthose who exercised the office of judges. See Judges v. 10: \"Speak, ye\nthat ride on white asses, ye that sit in judgment, and walk by the\nway.\" Such Asses are still in use for similar purposes, and are bred\nexpressly for the use of persons of rank. They are larger, and are\nthought to be swifter, than the ordinary breeds; but they are by no\nmeans hardy animals, and are said to be unsuitable for places near the\nsea-coast.\n\nBoth sexes used the Ass for riding, as they do now in the East. See\nfor example Judges i. 14, where we find that Achsah, the daughter of\nCaleb, rode on an Ass when she went to ask her father to give her some\nsprings of water, in addition to the land which he had previously\ngiven her as a dowry. Later in the Scriptural history we read that\nAbigail, the wife of the wealthy churl Nabal, rode to meet David on an\nAss, when she went to deprecate his anger against her husband (1 Sam.\nxxv. 23). And, still later, the woman of Shunem, who acted so\nhospitably towards Elisha, rode on an Ass to meet him when her child\nhad died from sunstroke in the field (see 2 Kings iv. 24).\n\nNow all these women were of high rank, and certainly neither of them\nwould have considered that riding on an Ass was an act of humility. We\nwill cite them in succession, and begin with Achsah. She was the\ndaughter of one of the most illustrious of the Israelites, a man of\nwhom we read as being almost the equal of Joshua, one of the\nillustrious two who were included in the special exemption from the\npunishment of rebellion. Moreover, Caleb was a man of enormous\nterritorial possessions, as we find from several passages in the Old\nTestament; a man who was able to give to his daughter not only a large\namount of land as a dowry, but also the wells or springs which\nmultiplied its value tenfold.\n\nNext we come to the case of Abigail, the wife of Nabal, who himself\nbelonged to the family of Caleb, and probably owed his wealth simply\nto the accident of his birth. It is related of Nabal, that his\n\"possessions were in Carmel, and the man was very great, and he had\nthree thousand sheep, and a thousand goats.\" Yet his wife, who\nundoubtedly ruled her household as a housewife should do, and who was\nthought worthy of becoming David's wife after the death of her\ncowardly husband, rode on an Ass when she went on a mission in which\nlife and death were involved.\n\nAnd lastly, the woman of Shunem, who rode on an Ass to meet Elisha,\nengaged in a mission in which the life of her only child was involved,\nwas a woman of great wealth (2 Kings iv. 8), who was able not only to\nreceive the prophet, but to build a chamber, and furnish it for him.\n\nNot to multiply examples, we see from these passages that the Ass of\nthe East was held in comparatively high estimation, being used for the\npurposes of the saddle, just as would a high-bred horse among\nourselves.\n\nConsequently, the Ass is really a different animal. In this country he\nis repressed, and seldom has an opportunity for displaying the\nintellectual powers which he possesses, and which are of a much higher\norder than is generally imagined. It is rather remarkable, that when\nwe wish to speak slightingly of intellect we liken the individual to\nan Ass or a goose, not knowing that we have selected just the\nquadruped and the bird which are least worthy of such a distinction.\n\nPutting aside the bird, as being at present out of place, we shall\nfind that the Ass is one of the cleverest of our domesticated animals.\nWe are apt to speak of the horse with a sort of reverence, and of the\nAss with contemptuous pity, not knowing that, of the two animals, the\nAss is by far the superior in point of intellect. It has been well\nremarked by a keen observer of nature, that if four or five horses are\nin a field, together with one Ass, and there be an assailable point in\nthe fence, the Ass is sure to be the animal that discovers it, and\nleads the way through it.\n\n [Illustration: SYRIAN ASSES.\n\n _\"A bridle for the ass._\"--PROV. xxvi.]\n\nTake even one of our own toil-worn animals, turned out in a common to\ngraze, and see the ingenuity which it displays when persecuted by the\nidle boys who generally frequent such places, and who try to ride\nevery beast that is within their reach. It seems to divine at once the\nobject of the boy as he steals up to it, and he takes a pleasure in\nbaffling him just as he fancies that he has succeeded in his attempt.\n\nShould the Ass be kindly treated, there is not an animal that proves\nmore docile, or even affectionate. Stripes and kicks it resents, and\nsets itself distinctly against them; and, being nothing but a slave,\nit follows the slavish principle of doing no work that it can possibly\navoid.\n\nNow, in the East the Ass takes so much higher rank than our own\nanimal, that its whole demeanour and gait are different from those\ndisplayed by the generality of its brethren in England. \"Why, the very\nslave of slaves,\" writes Mr. Lowth, in his \"Wanderer in Arabia,\" \"the\ncrushed and grief-stricken, is so no more in Egypt: the battered\ndrudge has become the willing servant. Is that active little fellow,\nwho, with race-horse coat and full flanks, moves under his rider with\nthe light step and the action of a pony--is he the same animal as that\nstarved and head-bowed object of the North, subject for all pity and\ncruelty, and clothed with rags and insult?\n\n\"Look at him now. On he goes, rapid and free, with his small head well\nup, and as gay as a crimson saddle and a bridle of light chains and\nred leather can make him. It was a gladdening sight to see the\nunfortunate as a new animal in Egypt.\"\n\nHardy animal as is the Ass, it is not well adapted for tolerance of\ncold, and seems to degenerate in size, strength, speed, and spirit in\nproportion as the climate becomes colder. Whether it might equal the\nhorse in its endurance of cold provided that it were as carefully\ntreated, is perhaps a doubtful point; but it is a well-known fact that\nthe horse does not necessarily degenerate by moving towards a colder\nclimate, though the Ass has always been found to do so.\n\nThere is, of course, a variety in the treatment which the Ass receives\neven in the East. Signor Pierotti, whose work on the customs and\ntraditions of Palestine has already been mentioned, writes in very\nglowing terms of the animal. He states that he formed a very high\nopinion of the Ass while he was in Egypt, not only from its spirited\naspect and its speed, but because it was employed even by the Viceroy\nand the great Court officers, who may be said to use Asses of more or\nless intelligence for every occasion. He even goes so far as to say\nthat, if all the Asses were taken away from Egypt, not a man would be\nleft.\n\nThe same traveller gives an admirable summary of the character of the\nAss, as it exists in Egypt and Palestine. \"What, then, are the\ncharacteristics of the ass? Much the same as those which adorn it in\nother parts of the East--namely, it is useful for riding and for\ncarrying burdens; it is sensible of kindness, and shows gratitude; it\nis very steady, and is larger, stronger, and more tractable than its\nEuropean congener; its pace is easy and pleasant; and it will shrink\nfrom no labour, if only its poor daily feed of straw and barley is\nfairly given.\n\n\"If well and liberally supplied, it is capable of any enterprise, and\nwears an altered and dignified mien, apparently forgetful of its\nextraction, except when undeservedly beaten by its masters, who,\nhowever, are not so much to be blamed, because, having learned to live\namong sticks, thongs, and rods, they follow the same system of\neducation with their miserable dependants.\n\n\"The wealthy feed him well, deck him with fine harness and silver\ntrappings, and cover him, when his work is done, with rich Persian\ncarpets. The poor do the best they can for him, steal for his benefit,\ngive him a corner at their fireside, and in cold weather sleep with\nhim for more warmth. In Palestine, all the rich men, whether monarchs\nor chiefs of villages, possess a number of asses, keeping them with\ntheir flocks, like the patriarchs of old. No one can travel in that\ncountry, and observe how the ass is employed for all purposes, without\nbeing struck with the exactness with which the Arabs retain the Hebrew\ncustoms.\"\n\nThe result of this treatment is, that the Eastern Ass is an enduring\nand tolerably swift animal, vying with the camel itself in its powers\nof long-continued travel, its usual pace being a sort of easy canter.\nOn rough ground, or up an ascent, it is said even to gain on the\nhorse, probably because its little sharp hoofs give it a firm footing\nwhere the larger hoof of the horse is liable to slip.\n\nThe familiar term \"saddling the Ass\" requires some little explanation.\n\nThe saddle is not in the least like the article which we know by that\nname, but is very large and complicated in structure. Over the\nanimal's back is first spread a cloth, made of thick woollen stuff,\nand folded several times. The saddle itself is a very thick pad of\nstraw, covered with carpet, and flat at the top, instead of being\nrounded as is the case with our saddles. The pommel is very high, and\nwhen the rider is seated on it, he is perched high above the back of\nthe animal. Over the saddle is thrown a cloth or carpet, always of\nbright colours, and varying in costliness of material and ornament\naccording to the wealth of the possessor. It is mostly edged with a\nfringe and tassels.\n\nThe bridle is decorated, like that of the horse, with bells,\nembroidery, tassels, shells, and other ornaments. An example of the\nheadstall worn by an Ass belonging to a wealthy man may be seen in the\nillustration.\n\nAs we may see from 2 Kings iv. 24, the Ass was generally guided by a\ndriver who ran behind it, just as is the custom with the hired Asses\nin this country. Owing to the unchanging character of the East, there\nis no doubt that the \"riders on asses\" of the Scriptures rode exactly\nafter the mode which is adopted at the present day. What that mode is,\nwe may learn from Mr. Bayard Taylor's amusing and vivid description of\na ride through the streets of Cairo:--\n\n\"To see Cairo thoroughly, one must first accustom himself to the ways\nof these long-eared cabs, without the use of which I would advise no\none to trust himself in the bazaars. Donkey-riding is universal, and\nno one thinks of going beyond the Frank quarters on foot. If he does,\nhe must submit to be followed by not less than six donkeys with their\ndrivers. A friend of mine who was attended by such a cavalcade for two\nhours, was obliged to yield at last, and made no second attempt. When\nwe first appeared in the gateway of an hotel, equipped for an\nexcursion, the rush of men and animals was so great that we were\nforced to retreat until our servant and the porter whipped us a path\nthrough the yelling and braying mob. After one or two trials I found\nan intelligent Arab boy named Kish, who for five piastres a day\nfurnished strong and ambitious donkeys, which he kept ready at the\ndoor from morning till night. The other drivers respected Kish's\nprivilege, and henceforth I had no trouble.\n\n\"The donkeys are so small that my feet nearly touched the ground, but\nthere is no end to their strength and endurance. Their gait, whether\nin pace or in gallop, is so easy and light that fatigue is impossible.\nThe drivers take great pride in having high-cushioned red saddles, and\nin hanging bits of jingling brass to the bridles. They keep their\ndonkeys close shorn, and frequently beautify them by painting them\nvarious colours. The first animal I rode had legs barred like a\nzebra's, and my friend's rejoiced in purple flanks and a yellow belly.\nThe drivers ran behind them with a short stick, punching them from\ntime to time, or giving them a sharp pinch on the rump. Very few of\nthem own their donkeys, and I understood their pertinacity when I\nlearned that they frequently received a beating on returning home\nempty-handed.\n\n\"The passage of the bazaars seems at first quite as hazardous on\ndonkey-back as on foot; but it is the difference between knocking\nsomebody down and being knocked down yourself, and one certainly\nprefers the former alternative. There is no use in attempting to guide\nthe donkey, for he won't be guided. The driver shouts behind, and you\nare dashed at full speed into a confusion of other donkeys, camels,\nhorses, carts, water-carriers, and footmen. In vain you cry out\n'_Bess_' (enough), '_Piacco_,' and other desperate adjurations; the\ndriver's only reply is: 'Let the bridle hang loose!' You dodge your\nhead under a camel-load of planks; your leg brushes the wheel of a\ndust-cart; you strike a fat Turk plump in the back; you miraculously\nescape upsetting a fruit-stand; you scatter a company of spectral,\nwhite-masked women; and at last reach some more quiet street, with the\nsensations of a man who has stormed a battery.\n\n\"At first this sort of riding made me very nervous, but presently I\nlet the donkey go his own way, and took a curious interest in seeing\nhow near a chance I ran of striking or being struck. Sometimes there\nseemed no hope of avoiding a violent collision; but, by a series of\nthe most remarkable dodges, he generally carried you through in\nsafety. The cries of the driver running behind gave me no little\namusement. 'The hawadji comes! Take care on the right hand! Take care\non the left hand! O man, take care! O maiden, take care! O boy, get\nout of the way! The hawadji comes!' Kish had strong lungs, and his\ndonkey would let nothing pass him; and so wherever we went we\ncontributed our full share to the universal noise and confusion.\"\n\nThis description explains several allusions which are made in the\nScriptures to treading down the enemies in the streets, and to the\nchariots raging and jostling against each other in the ways.\n\nThe Ass was used in the olden time for carrying burdens, as it is at\npresent, and, in all probability, carried them in the same way. Sacks\nand bundles are tied firmly to the pack-saddle; but poles, planks, and\nobjects of similar shape are tied in a sloping direction on the side\nof the saddle, the longer ends trailing on the ground, and the shorter\nprojecting at either side of the animal's head. The North American\nIndians carry the poles of their huts, or wigwams, in precisely the\nsame way, tying them on either side of their horses, and making them\ninto rude sledges, upon which are fastened the skins that form the\nwalls of their huts. The same system of carriage is also found among\nthe Esquimaux, and the hunters of the extreme North, who harness their\ndogs in precisely the same manner. The Ass, thus laden, becomes a very\nunpleasant passenger through the narrow and crowded streets of an\nOriental city; and many an unwary traveller has found reason to\nremember the description of Issachar as the strong Ass between two\nburdens.\n\nThe Ass was also used for agriculture, and was employed in the plough,\nas we find from many passages. See for example, \"Blessed are ye that\nsow beside all waters, that send forth thither the feet of the ox and\nthe ass\" (Isa. xxxii. 20). Sowing beside the waters is a custom that\nstill prevails in all hot countries, the margins of rivers being\ntilled, while outside this cultivated belt there is nothing but desert\nground.\n\nThe ox and the Ass were used in the first place for irrigation,\nturning the machines by which water was lifted from the river, and\npoured into the trenches which conveyed it to all parts of the tilled\nland. If, as is nearly certain, the rude machinery of the East is at\nthe present day identical with those which were used in the old\nScriptural times, they were yoked to the machine in rather an\ningenious manner. The machine consists of an upright pivot, and to it\nis attached the horizontal pole to which the ox or Ass is harnessed. A\nmachine exactly similar in principle may be seen in almost any\nbrick-field in England; but the ingenious part of the Eastern\nwater-machine is the mode in which the animal is made to believe that\nit is being driven by its keeper, whereas the man in question might be\nat a distance, or fast asleep.\n\nThe animal is first blindfolded, and then yoked to the end of the\nhorizontal bar. Fixed to the pivot, and rather in front of the bar, is\none end of a slight and elastic strip of wood. The projecting end,\nbeing drawn forward and tied to the bridle of the animal, keeps up a\ncontinual pull, and makes the blinded animal believe that it is being\ndrawn forward by the hand of a driver. Some ingenious but lazy\nattendants have even invented a sort of self-acting whip, i.e. a stick\nwhich is lifted and allowed to fall on the animal's back by the action\nof the wheel once every round.\n\nThe field being properly supplied with water, the Ass is used for\nploughing it. It is worthy of mention that at the present day the\nprohibition against yoking an ox and an Ass together is often\ndisregarded. The practice, however, is not a judicious one, as the\nslow and heavy ox does not act well with the lighter and more active\nanimal, and, moreover, is apt to butt at its companion with its horns\nin order to stimulate it to do more than its fair proportion of the\nwork.\n\nThat the Ass was put to a similar use in turning the large millstones\nmay be seen from Matt. xviii. 6. In the Authorized Version, the\npassage is rendered thus: \"But whoso shall offend one of these little\nones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were\nhanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the\nsea.\"\n\nNow if we turn to the Greek Testament we find that the passage reads\nrather differently, a force being giving to it which it does not\npossess in the translation: \"But whosoever shall scandalize [_i.e._ be\na stumbling-block to] one of these little ones that believe in Me, it\nwere better for him that an ass's millstone were hung about his neck,\nand he were sunk in the depth of the sea.\" The chief force of this\nsaying lies in the word which is omitted in our translation. Our Lord\nspecially selected the Ass's millstone on account of its size and\nweight, in contradistinction to the ordinary millstone, which was\nturned backwards and forwards by the hands of women.\n\nThere is a custom now in Palestine which probably existed in the days\nof the Scriptures, though I have not been able to find any reference\nto it. Whenever an Ass is disobedient and strays from its master, the\nman who captures the trespasser on his grounds clips a piece out of\nits ear before he returns it to its owner. Each time that the animal\nis caught on forbidden grounds it receives a fresh clip of the ear. By\nlooking at the ears of an Ass, therefore, any one can tell whether it\nhas ever been a straggler; and if so, he knows the number of times\nthat it has strayed, by merely counting the clip-marks, which always\nbegin at the tip of the ear, and extend along the edges. Any Ass, no\nmatter how handsome it may be, that has many of those clips, is always\nrejected by experienced travellers, as it is sure to be a dull as well\nas a disobedient beast.\n\nSignor Pierotti remarks that if the owners of the Asses were treated\nsimilarly for similar offences, the greater number would be marked as\nsoon as they begin to walk, and of the adults there would be scarcely\none who had any ear on his head.\n\nThe Ass being so universally useful, we need not be surprised at the\nprominence which it takes in the Scriptural narrative, and the\nfrequency with which its name occurs. The wealthy personages of the\nolden time seemed to have esteemed the Ass as highly as the camel, the\nox, the sheep, or the goat. Abraham, for example, is described as\nbeing a rich man, and possessing \"sheep, and oxen, and he-asses, and\nmen-servants, and maid-servants, and she-asses, and camels\" (Gen. xii.\n16). In a succeeding chapter (xxx. 43) the prosperity of Jacob is\nmentioned in almost exactly the same terms.\n\nSo, before Job's trials came upon him, \"his substance was seven\nthousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of\noxen [_i.e._ 1,000], and five hundred she-asses, and a very great\nhousehold; so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the\neast\" (Job i. 3). And after his trials, when his wealth was restored\nto him twofold, the thousand she-asses are mentioned as prominently as\nthe thousand yoke of oxen.\n\nThat the care of the Asses was an honourable post we learn from\nseveral passages. Take for example Gen. xxxvi. 24: \"And these are the\nchildren of Zibeon; both Ajah, and Anah: this was that Anah that found\nthe mules in the wilderness, as he fed the asses of Zibeon his\nfather.\" The charge of the Asses was, as the reader must see, a post\nof sufficient honour and importance to be trusted to the son of the\nowner. A similar case is recorded in the well-known instance of Saul,\nwhose father had lost his herd of Asses, and who at once sent his son\nupon the important mission of recovering them. And it was during the\nfulfilment of this mission that he was anointed the first king of\nIsrael.\n\nLater in the sacred history we find that when David consolidated his\npower, and organized the affairs of his new kingdom, he divided the\npeople in general, the army, the land, the produce, and the cattle,\ninto departments, and appointed over each department some eminent man\nwhose name is carefully given. After mentioning that the people and\nthe army were divided into \"courses,\" and that certain officers were\nset over each course, the sacred historian proceeds to state that one\nofficer was appointed as overseer of the treasury, another of the\ngranaries, another of the field-labourers, another over the vineyards,\nand so forth. He then mentions that even the cattle were divided into\ntheir several departments, the care of the hill-cattle being given to\none man, and of the cattle of the plain to another, of the camels to a\nthird, and of the Asses to a fourth.\n\nIt is scarcely necessary to mention that the flesh of the Ass was\nforbidden to the Jews, because the animal neither chewed the cud nor\ndivided the hoof. How repulsive to them must have been the flesh of\nthe Ass we may infer from the terrible description of the siege of\nSamaria by Benhadad. The sacred historian describes with painful\nfidelity the horrors of the siege, and of the dreadful extremity to\nwhich the people were reduced. No circumstance could be more terrible\nthan the quarrel between the two mothers, who had mutually agreed to\nkill and eat their children, and yet on a par with that dreadful\nstatement is mentioned the fact that even the flesh of the Ass was\neaten, and that an Ass's head cost eighty pieces of silver.\n\nWhether the milk of the she Ass were used or not is rather a doubtful\npoint, but, in all probability, the milk was considered as lawful\nfood, though the flesh might not be eaten.\n\nAs to the legends respecting the Ass, they are innumerable, and I\nshall only mention one or two of them.\n\nThe first is an old Rabbinical legend respecting the Flood and the\nadmission of the creatures into the ark. It appears that no being\ncould enter the ark unless specially invited to do so by Noah. Now\nwhen the Flood came, and overwhelmed the world, the devil, who was at\nthat time wandering upon the earth, saw that he was about to be cut\noff from contact from mankind, and that his dominion would be for ever\ngone. The ark being at last completed, and the beasts called to enter\nit in their proper order, the turn of the Ass came in due course.\n\nUnfortunately for the welfare of mankind, the Ass was taken with a fit\nof obstinacy, and refused to enter the vessel according to orders.\nAfter wasting much time over the obstinate animal, Noah at last lost\npatience, and struck the Ass sharply, crying at the same time to it,\n\"Enter, thou devil!\" Of course the invitation was at once accepted,\nthe devil entered the ark, and on the subsiding of the water issued\nout to take his place in the newly begun world.\n\n\nSince the Christian era, many curious legends have sprung up\nrespecting the Ass. One of the most familiar of these legends refers\nto the black stripe along the spine and the cross-bar over the\nshoulder. This black cross is really believed by many persons to have\nbeen given to the animal in consequence of its connexion with our\nLord. I need hardly tell the reader that it is the remnant of the\nstripes which in the zebra cover the animal from head to foot, which\nin the quagga cover the head, body, and part of the limbs, and which\nin one species of Wild Ass are not seen at all in the adult animal.\n\nThere is another Christian legend respecting the Ass of Palestine,\nwhich is thought to owe its superiority in size, swiftness, and\nstrength to the fact that it helped to warm the infant Saviour in the\nmanger, that it carried Him and His mother into Egypt and back again,\nand that it was used by the Lord himself and His disciples. Any one\nwho ventures to hint that the Ass of Palestine owes its superiority\nover its European brother to the warmer climate, is thought to be a\nheretic by the pious but ignorant men who believe and disseminate such\nlegends.\n\nSignor Pierotti tells a story of a certain Russian monk who happened\nto visit Palestine, and in the course of his travels found the\nleg-bone of an Ass, which he took back with him and publicly exhibited\nas part of the identical animal on which the Virgin Mary and infant\nSaviour rode. (I need scarcely mention that there is no mention in the\nScriptures of the fact that the Holy Family rode upon an Ass; though\nsuch a mode of travel was certainly the one which they would adopt.)\nFor some time, this deception drew for the impostor many gifts from\nthe superstitious but pious people, but the affair at last reached the\nears of his superiors, and he paid the deserved penalty of his\ntrickery.\n\nThere are recorded in the Scriptures two remarkable circumstances\nconnected with the Ass, which, however, need but a few words. The\nfirst is the journey of Balaam from Pethor to Moab, in the course of\nwhich there occurred that singular incident of the Ass speaking in\nhuman language (see Numb. xxii. 21, 35). The second is the well-known\nepisode in the story of Samson, where he is recorded as breaking the\ncords with which his enemies had bound him, and killing a thousand\nPhilistines with the fresh jaw-bone of an Ass.\n\n\n\n\nTHE WILD ASS.\n\n The Arod and Pere of Scripture--Various allusions to the Wild\n Ass--Its swiftness and wildness--The Wild Ass of Asia and\n Africa--Knowledge of the animal displayed by the sacred\n writers--How the Wild Ass is hunted--Excellence of its\n flesh--Sir R. K. Porter's meeting with a Wild Ass--Origin of the\n domestic Ass--The Wild Asses of Quito.\n\n\nThere are several passages of Scripture in which the Wild Ass is\ndistinguished from the domesticated animal, and in all of them there\nis some reference made to its swiftness, its intractable nature, and\nlove of freedom.\n\nIn the Hebrew Scriptures there are two words which are given in the\nAuthorized Translation as Wild Ass, namely, Arod and Pere, and it is\nrather remarkable that both words occur in the same passage. If the\nreader will refer to Job xxxix. 5, he will see the following passage:\n\"Who hath sent out the wild ass (Pere) free? or who hath loosed the\nbands of the wild ass (Arod)?\" Now there are only two places in the\nwhole Hebrew Scriptures in which the word Arod occurs, and there are\nmany doubts whether the word Arod is rightly translated. The first is\nthat which has just been quoted, and the second occurs in Dan. v. 21:\n\"And he was driven from the sons of men; and his heart was made like\nthe beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild asses.\"\n\nThe Jewish Bible translates the word differently in the two passages.\nThat in Job it renders as follows: \"Who hath sent forth the wild ass\nfree? or who hath loosed the bands of the untamed?\" In the other\npassage, however, it follows the rendering of the Authorized Version,\nand gives the word as \"wild asses.\" It is thought by several scholars\nthat the two words refer to two different species of Wild Ass. It may\nbe so, but as the ancient writers had the loosest possible ideas\nregarding distinction of species, and as, moreover, it is very\ndoubtful whether there be any real distinction of species at all, we\nmay allow the subject to rest, merely remembering that the rendering\nof the Jewish Bible, \"the untamed,\" is a correct translation of the\nword Arod, though the particular animal to which it is applied may be\ndoubtful.\n\nWe will now pass to the word about which there is no doubt whatever,\nnamely, the Pere. This animal is clearly the species which is\nscientifically known as _Asinus hemippus_. During the summer time it\nhas a distinct reddish tinge on the grey coat, which disappears in the\nwinter, and the cross-streak is black. There are several kinds of Wild\nAss known to science, all of which have different names. Some of our\nbest zoologists, however, have come to the conclusion that they all\nreally belong to the same species, differing only in slight points of\nstructure which are insufficient to constitute separate species.\n\nThe habits of the Wild Ass are the same, whether it be the Asiatic or\nthe African animal, and a description of one will answer equally well\nfor the other. It is an astonishingly swift animal, so that on the\nlevel ground even the best horse has scarcely a chance of overtaking\nit. It is exceedingly wary, its sight, hearing, and sense of scent\nbeing equally keen, so that to approach it by craft is a most\ndifficult task.\n\nLike many other wild animals, it has a custom of ascending hills or\nrising grounds, and thence surveying the country, and even in the\nplains it will generally contrive to discover some earth-mound or heap\nof sand from which it may act as sentinel and give the alarm in case\nof danger. It is a gregarious animal, always assembling in herds,\nvarying from two or three to several hundred in number, and has a\nhabit of partial migration in search of green food, traversing large\ntracts of country in its passage.\n\nIt has a curiously intractable disposition, and, even when captured\nvery young, can scarcely ever be brought to bear a burden or draw a\nvehicle. Attempts have been often made to domesticate the young that\nhave been born in captivity, but with very slight success, the wild\nnature of the animal constantly breaking out, even when it appears to\nhave become moderately tractable.\n\nAlthough the Wild Ass does not seem to have lived within the limits of\nthe Holy Land, it was common enough in the surrounding country, and,\nfrom the frequent references made to it in Scriptures, was well known\nto the ancient Jews. We will now look at the various passages in which\nthe Wild Ass is mentioned, and begin with the splendid description in\nJob xxxix. 5-8:\n\n\"Who hath sent out the wild ass free? or who hath loosed the bands of\nthe wild ass?\n\n\"Whose house I have made the wilderness, and the barren lands (or salt\nplaces) his dwellings.\n\n\"He scorneth the multitude of the city, neither regardeth he the\ncrying of the driver.\n\n\"The range of the mountains is his pasture, and he searcheth after\nevery green thing.\"\n\nHere we have the animal described with the minuteness and truth of\ndetail that can only be found in personal knowledge; its love of\nfreedom, its avoidance of mankind, and its migration in search of\npasture. Another allusion to the pasture-seeking habits of the animal\nis to be found in chapter vi. of the same book, verse 5: \"Doth the\nwild ass bray when he hath grass?\" or, according to the version of the\nJewish Bible, \"over tender grass?\"\n\nThe same author has several other allusions to the Wild Ass. See, for\nexample, chap. xi. 12: \"For vain man would be wise, though man be born\nlike a wild ass's colt.\" And in chap. xxiv. 5, in speaking of the\nwicked and their doings, he uses the following metaphor: \"Behold, as\nwild asses in the desert, go they forth to their work; rising betimes\nfor a prey: the wilderness yieldeth food for them and their children,\"\nor for the young, as the passage may be more literally rendered. The\nsame migratory habit is also mentioned by the prophet Jeremiah (chap.\nxiv. 6): \"And the wild asses did stand in the high places, they\nsnuffed up the wind like dragons; their eyes did fail, because there\nwas no grass.\" There is another allusion to it in Hosea viii. 9: \"For\nthey are gone up to Assyria, a wild ass alone by himself.\"\n\nEven in the earliest times of Jewish history we find a reference to\nthe peculiar nature of this animal. In Gen. xvi. 12 it is prophesied\nof Ishmael, that \"he will be a wild man; his hand will be against\nevery man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the\npresence of all his brethren.\" Now the real force of this passage is\nquite missed in the Authorized Version, the correct rendering being\ngiven in the Jewish Bible: \"And he will be a wild ass (Pere) among\nmen; his hand will be against all, and the hand of all against him,\nand in the face of all his brethren he shall dwell.\"\n\nAllusion is made to the speed of the animal in Jer. ii. 24: \"A wild\nass used to the wilderness, that snuffeth up the wind at her pleasure;\nin her occasion who can turn her away? all they that seek her will not\nweary themselves; in her month they shall find her.\" The fondness of\nthe Wild Ass for the desert is mentioned by the prophet Isaiah.\nForetelling the desolation that was to come upon the land, he uses\nthese words: \"Because the palaces shall be forsaken, the multitude of\nthe city shall be left; the forts and towers shall be for dens (or\ncaves) for ever, and a joy of wild asses, a pasture of flocks.\"\n\nThese various qualities of speed, wariness, and dread of man cause the\nanimal to be exceedingly prized by hunters, who find their utmost\nskill taxed in approaching it. Men of the highest rank give whole days\nto the hunt of the Wild Ass, and vie with each other for the honour of\ninflicting the first wound on so fleet an animal. With the exception\nof the Jews, the inhabitants of the countries where the Wild Ass lives\neat its flesh, and consider it as the greatest dainty which can be\nfound.\n\nA very vivid account of the appearance of the animal in its wild state\nis given by Sir R. Kerr Porter, who was allowed by a Wild Ass to\napproach within a moderate distance, the animal evidently seeing that\nhe was not one of the people to whom it was accustomed, and being\ncurious enough to allow the stranger to approach him.\n\n [Illustration: THE WILD ASS.\n\n \"As wild asses in the desert go they forth.\"--JOB xxiv. 5.]\n\n\"The sun was just rising over the summit of the eastern mountains,\nwhen my greyhound started off in pursuit of an animal which, my\nPersians said, from the glimpse they had of it, was an antelope.\nI instantly put spurs to my horse, and with my attendants gave\nchase. After an unrelaxed gallop of three miles, we came up with\nthe dog, who was then within a short stretch of the creature he\npursued; and to my surprise, and at first vexation, I saw it to be an\nass.\n\n\"Upon reflection, however, judging from its fleetness that it must be\na wild one, a creature little known in Europe, but which the Persians\nprize above all other animals as an object of chase, I determined to\napproach as near to it as the very swift Arab I was on could carry me.\nBut the single instant of checking my horse to consider had given our\ngame such a head of us that, notwithstanding our speed, we could not\nrecover our ground on him.\n\n\"I, however, happened to be considerably before my companions, when,\nat a certain distance, the animal in its turn made a pause, and\nallowed me to approach within pistol-shot of him. He then darted off\nagain with the quickness of thought, capering, kicking, and sporting\nin his flight, as if he were not blown in the least, and the chase was\nhis pastime. When my followers of the country came up, they regretted\nthat I had not shot the creature when he was within my aim, telling me\nthat his flesh is one of the greatest delicacies in Persia.\n\n\"The prodigious swiftness and the peculiar manner in which he fled\nacross the plain coincided exactly with the description that Xenophon\ngives of the same animal in Arabia. But above all, it reminded me of\nthe striking portrait drawn by the author of the Book of Job. I was\ninformed by the Mehnander, who had been in the desert when making a\npilgrimage to the shrine of Ali, that the wild ass of Irak Arabi\ndiffers in nothing from the one I had just seen. He had observed them\noften for a short time in the possession of the Arabs, who told him\nthe creature was perfectly untameable.\n\n\"A few days after this discussion, we saw another of these animals,\nand, pursuing it determinately, had the good fortune to kill it.\"\n\n\nIt has been suggested by many zoologists that the Wild Ass is the\nprogenitor of the domesticated species. The origin of the domesticated\nanimal, however, is so very ancient, that we have no data whereon\neven a theory can be built. It is true that the Wild and the\nDomesticated Ass are exactly similar in appearance, and that an\n_Asinus hemippus_, or Wild Ass, looks so like an Asiatic _Asinus\nvulgaris_, or Domesticated Ass, that by the eye alone the two are\nhardly distinguishable from each other. But with their appearance the\nresemblance ends, the domestic animal being quiet, docile, and fond of\nman, while the wild animal is savage, intractable, and has an\ninvincible repugnance to human beings.\n\nThis diversity of spirit in similar forms is very curious, and is\nstrongly exemplified by the semi-wild Asses of Quito. They are the\ndescendants of the animals that were imported by the Spaniards, and\nlive in herds, just as do the horses. They combine the habits of the\nWild Ass with the disposition of the tame animal. They are as swift of\nfoot as the Wild Ass of Syria or Africa, and have the same habit of\nfrequenting lofty situations, leaping about among rocks and ravines,\nwhich seem only fitted for the wild goat, and into which no horse can\nfollow them.\n\nNominally, they are private property, but practically they may be\ntaken by any one who chooses to capture them. The lasso is employed\nfor the purpose, and when the animals are caught they bite, and kick,\nand plunge, and behave exactly like their wild relations of the Old\nWorld, giving their captors infinite trouble in avoiding the teeth and\nhoofs which they wield so skilfully. But, as soon as a load has once\nbeen bound on the back of one of these furious creatures, the wild\nspirit dies out of it, the head droops, the gait becomes steady, and\nthe animal behaves as if it had led a domesticated life all its days.\n\n\n\n\nTHE MULE.\n\n Ancient use of the Mules--Various breeds of Mule--Supposed date\n of its introduction into Palestine--Mule-breeding forbidden to\n the Jews--The Mule as a saddle-animal--Its use on occasions of\n state--The king's Mule--Mules brought from Babylon after the\n captivity--Obstinacy of the Mule--The Mule as a beast of\n burden--The \"Mule's burden\" of earth--Mules imported by the\n Phoenicians--Legends respecting the Mule.\n\n\nThere are several references to the Mule in the Holy Scriptures, but\nit is remarkable that the animal is not mentioned at all until the\ntime of David, and that in the New Testament the name does not occur\nat all.\n\nThe origin of the MULE is unknown, but that the mixed breed between\nthe horse and the ass has been employed in many countries from very\nancient times is a familiar fact. It is a very strange circumstance\nthat the offspring of these two animals should be, for some purposes,\nfar superior to either of the parents, a well-bred Mule having the\nlightness, surefootedness, and hardy endurance of the ass, together\nwith the increased size and muscular development of the horse. Thus it\nis peculiarly adapted either for the saddle or for the conveyance of\nburdens over a rough or desert country.\n\nThe Mules that are most generally serviceable are bred from the male\nass and the mare, those which have the horse as the father and the ass\nas the mother being small, and comparatively valueless. At the present\nday, Mules are largely employed in Spain and the Spanish dependencies,\nand there are some breeds which are of very great size and singular\nbeauty, those of Andalusia being especially celebrated. In the Andes,\nthe Mule has actually superseded the llama as a beast of burden.\n\nIts appearance in the sacred narrative is quite sudden. In Gen. xxxvi.\n24, there is a passage which seems as if it referred to the Mule:\n\"This was that Anah that found the mules in the wilderness.\" Now the\nword which is here rendered as Mules is \"Yemim,\" a word which is not\nfound elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures. The best Hebraists are\nagreed that, whatever interpretation may be put upon the word, it\ncannot possibly have the signification that is here assigned to it.\nSome translate the word as \"hot springs,\" while the editors of the\nJewish Bible prefer to leave it untranslated, thus signifying that\nthey are not satisfied with any rendering.\n\n [Illustration: MULES OF THE EAST\n\n \"_Be ye not as the horse and mule, which have no under\n standing._\"--PSALM xxxii. 9.]\n\nThe word which is properly translated as Mule is \"Pered;\" and the\nfirst place where it occurs is 2 Sam. xiii. 29. Absalom had taken\nadvantage of a sheep-shearing feast to kill his brother Amnon in\nrevenge for the insult offered to Tamar: \"And the servants of Absalom\ndid unto Amnon as Absalom had commanded. Then all the king's sons\narose, and every man gat him up upon his mule, and fled.\" It is\nevident from this passage that the Mule must have been in use for a\nconsiderable time, as the sacred writer mentions, as a matter of\ncourse, that the king's sons had each his own riding mule.\n\nFarther on, chap. xviii. 9 records the event which led to the death of\nAbsalom by the hand of Joab. \"And Absalom met the servants of David.\nAnd Absalom rode upon a mule, and the mule went under the thick boughs\nof a great oak, and his head caught hold of the oak, and he was taken\nup between the heaven and the earth; and the mule that was under him\nwent away.\"\n\nWe see by these passages that the Mule was held in such high\nestimation that it was used by the royal princes for the saddle, and\nhad indeed superseded the ass. In another passage we shall find that\nthe Mule was ridden by the king himself when he travelled in state,\nand that to ride upon the king's Mule was considered as equivalent to\nsitting upon the king's throne. See, for example, 1 Kings i. in which\nthere are several passages illustrative of this curious fact. See\nfirst, ver. 33, in which David gives to Zadok the priest, Nathan the\nprophet, and Benaiah the captain of the hosts, instructions for\nbringing his son Solomon to Gihon, and anointing him king in the stead\nof his father: \"Take with you the servants of your lord, and cause\nSolomon my son to ride upon mine own mule, and bring him down to\nGihon.\"\n\nThen, in ver. 38, we are told that David's orders were obeyed, that\nSolomon was set on the king's Mule, was anointed by Zadok, and\nproclaimed as king to the people. In ver. 44 we are told how Adonijah,\nwho had attempted to usurp the throne, and was at the very time\nholding a coronation feast, heard the sound of the trumpets and the\nshouting in honour of Solomon, and on inquiring was told that Solomon\nhad been crowned king by Zadok, recognised by Nathan, accepted by\nBenaiah, and had ridden on the king's Mule. These tidings alarmed him,\nand caused him to flee for protection to the altar. Now it is very\nremarkable that in each of these three passages the fact that Solomon\nrode upon the king's Mule is brought prominently forward, and it was\nadduced to Adonijah as a proof that Solomon had been made the new king\nof Israel.\n\nThat the Mule should have become so important an animal seems most\nremarkable. In Levit. xix. 19 there is an express injunction against\nthe breeding of Mules, and it is unlikely, therefore, that they were\nbred in Palestine. But, although the Jews were forbidden to breed\nMules, they evidently thought that the prohibition did not extend to\nthe use of these animals, and from the time of David we find that they\nwere very largely employed both for the saddle and as beasts of\nburden. In all probability, the Mules were imported from Egypt and\nother countries, and that such importation was one of the means for\nfurnishing Palestine with these animals we learn from 1 Kings x. 24,\n25, in which the sacred writer enumerates the various tribute which\nwas paid to Solomon: \"All the earth sought to Solomon, to hear the\nwisdom which God had put in his heart.\n\n\"And they brought every man his present, vessels of silver, and\nvessels of gold, and garments, and armour, and spices, horses, and\nmules, a rate year by year.\" The same fact is recorded in 2 Chron. ix.\n24.\n\nIn the time of Isaiah the Mule was evidently in common use as a riding\nanimal for persons of distinction. See chap. lxvi. 20: \"And they shall\nbring all your brethren for an offering unto the Lord, out of all\nnations, upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules,\nand upon swift beasts, to My holy mountain Jerusalem.\" Another\nallusion to the Mule as one of the recognised domesticated animals is\nfound in Zech. xiv. 15: \"So shall be the plague of the horse, of the\nmule, of the camel, and of the ass, and of all the beasts that shall\nbe in these tents, as this plague.\"\n\nThe value of these animals may be inferred from the anxiety of Ahab to\npreserve his Mules during the long drought that had destroyed all the\npasturage. \"Ahab said unto Obadiah, Go into the land, unto all\nfountains of water, and unto all brooks: peradventure we may find\ngrass to save the horses and mules alive, that we lose not all the\nbeasts.\"\n\nNow this Obadiah was a very great man. He was governor of the king's\npalace, an office which has been compared to that of our Lord High\nChamberlain. He possessed such influence that, although he was known\nto be a worshipper of Jehovah, and to have saved a hundred prophets\nduring Jezebel's persecution, he retained his position, either because\nno one dared to inform against him, or because he was too powerful to\nbe attacked. Yet to Obadiah was assigned the joint office of seeking\nfor pasturage for the Mules, the king himself sharing the task with\nhis chamberlain, thus showing the exceeding value which must have been\nset on these appanages of royal state.\n\nTheir importance may be gathered from a passage in the Book of Ezra,\nin which, after enumerating with curious minuteness the number of the\nJews who returned home from their Babylonish captivity, the sacred\nchronicler proceeds to remark that \"their horses were seven hundred\nthirty and six; their mules, two hundred forty and five; their camels,\nfour hundred thirty and five; their asses, six thousand seven hundred\nand twenty\" (Ezra ii. 66, 67). There is a parallel passage in Neh.\nvii. 68, 69.\n\nSeeing that the Mule was in such constant use as a riding animal, it\nis somewhat remarkable that we never find in the Scripture any mention\nof the obstinate disposition which is proverbially associated with the\nanimal. There is only one passage which can be thought even to bear\nupon such a subject, and that is the familiar sentence from Ps. xxxii.\n9: \"Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no\nunderstanding: whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle, lest\nthey come near unto thee;\" and, as the reader will see, no particular\nobstinacy or frowardness is attributed to the Mule which is not\nascribed to the horse also.\n\nStill, that the Mule was as obstinate and contentious an animal in\nPalestine as it is in Europe is evident from the fact that the Eastern\nmules of the present day are quite as troublesome as their European\nbrethren. They are very apt to shy at anything, or nothing at all;\nthey bite fiercely, and every now and then they indulge in a violent\nkicking fit, flinging out their heels with wonderful force and\nrapidity, and turning round and round on their fore-feet so quickly\nthat it is hardly possible to approach them. There is scarcely a\ntraveller in the Holy Land who has not some story to tell about the\nMule and its perverse disposition; but, as these anecdotes have but\nvery slight bearing on the subject of the Mule as mentioned in the\nScriptures, they will not be given in these pages.\n\nThat the Mule was employed as a beast of burden as well as for riding,\nwe gather from several passages in the Old Testament. See, for\nexample, 1 Chron. xii. 40: \"Moreover they that were nigh them, even\nunto Issachar and Zebulun and Naphtali, brought bread on asses, and on\ncamels, and on mules, and on oxen.\" We have also the well-known\npassage in which is recorded the reply of Naaman to Elisha after the\nlatter had cured him of his leprosy: \"And Naaman said, Shall there not\nthen, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules' burden of\nearth?\" It does not necessarily follow that two of Naaman's Mules were\nto be laden with earth, but the probability is, that Naaman used the\nterm \"a Mule's burden\" to express a certain quantity, just as we talk\nof a \"load\" of hay or gravel.\n\nAs Mules are animals of such value, we may feel some little surprise\nthat they were employed as beasts of burden. It is possible, however,\nthat a special and costly breed of large and handsome Mules, like\nthose of Andalusia, were reserved for the saddle, and that the smaller\nand less showy animals were employed in the carriage of burdens.\n\nBefore parting entirely with the Mule, it will be well to examine the\nonly remaining passage in which the animal is mentioned. It occurs in\nEzek. xxvii. 14: \"They of the house of Togarmah traded in thy fairs\nwith horses and horsemen and mules.\" The chapter in which this passage\noccurs is a sustained lamentation over Tyre, in which the writer first\nenumerates the wealth and greatness of the city, and then bewails its\ndownfall. Beginning with the words, \"O Tyrus, thou hast said, I am of\nperfect beauty,\" the prophet proceeds to mention the various details\nof its magnificence, the number and beauty of its ships built with\nfirs from Senir, having oars made of the oaks of Bashan, masts of the\ncedars of Lebanon, benches of ivory, sails of \"fine linen with\nbroidered work from Egypt,\" and coverings of purple and scarlet from\nthe isles of Elishah. The rowers were from Zidon and Arvad, while Tyre\nitself furnished their pilots or steersmen.\n\nAfter a passing allusion to the magnificent army of Tyre, the sacred\nwriter proceeds to mention the extent of the merchandise that was\nbrought to this queen of ancient seaports: silver and other metals\nwere from Tarshish, slaves and brass from Meshech, ivory and ebony\nfrom Dedan, jewellery and fine linen from Syria; wheat, honey, and oil\nfrom Jud\u00e6a; wine and white wool from Damascus, and so forth. And,\namong all these riches, are prominently mentioned the horses and Mules\nfrom Togarmah. Now, it has been settled by the best bibliographers\nthat the Togarmah of Ezekiel is Armenia, and so we have the fact that\nthe Phoenicians supplied themselves with Mules and horses by importing\nthem from Armenia instead of breeding those animals themselves, just\nas Palestine imported its horses, and probably its Mules also, from\nEgypt.\n\nIt is rather remarkable that the Arabs of Palestine very seldom breed\nthe Mule for themselves, but, like the ancient Jews, import them from\nadjacent countries, mostly from the Lebanon district. Those from\nCyprus are, however, much valued, as they are very strong, diligent,\nand steady, their pace being nearly equal to that of the horse. Mules\nare seldom used for agricultural purposes, though they are extensively\nemployed for riding and for carrying burdens, especially over rocky\ndistricts.\n\nThe Mule is not without its legend. One of the oddest of these\naccounts for its obstinacy and its incapacity for breeding.\n\nWhen the Holy Family was about to travel into Egypt, St. Joseph chose\na Mule to carry them. He was in the act of saddling the animal, when\nit kicked him after the fashion of Mules. Angry with it for such\nmisconduct, St. Joseph substituted an ass for the Mule, thus giving\nthe former the honour of conveying the family into Egypt, and laid a\ncurse upon it that it should never have parents nor descendants of its\nown kind, and that it should be so disliked as never to be admitted\ninto its master's house, as is the case with the horse and other\ndomesticated animals. This is one of the multitudinous legends which\nare told to the crowds of pilgrims who come annually to see the\nmiraculous kindling of the holy fire, and to visit the tree on which\nJudas hanged himself.\n\n\n\n\nSWINE.\n\n The Mosaic prohibition of the pig--Hatred of Swine by Jews and\n Mahometans--A strange use of bacon--The prodigal son--Resistance\n to the persecution of Antiochus--Swine hated by the early\n Egyptians--Supposed connexion between Swine and diseases of the\n skin--Destruction of the herd of Swine--The locality of the\n event discovered--Pigs bred for the monasteries--The jewel of\n gold in a Swine's snout--The wild boar of the woods, and the\n beast of the reeds--The damage which it does to the\n vines--General account of the wild boar of Palestine--Excellence\n of its flesh.\n\n\nMany are the animals which are specially mentioned in the Mosaic law\nas unfit for food, beside those that come under the general head of\nbeing unclean because they do not divide the hoof and chew the cud.\nThere is none, however, that excited such abhorrence as the hog, or\nthat was more utterly detested.\n\nIt is utterly impossible for a European, especially one of the present\nday, to form even an idea of the utter horror and loathing with which\nthe hog was regarded by the ancient Jews. Even at the present day, a\nzealous Jew or Mahometan looks upon the hog, or anything that belongs\nto the hog, with an abhorrence too deep for words. The older and\nstricter Jews felt so deeply on this subject, that they would never\neven mention the name of the hog, but always substituted for the\nobjectionable word the term \"the abomination.\"\n\nSeveral references are made in the Scriptures to the exceeding disgust\nfelt by the Jews towards the Swine. The portion of the Mosaic law on\nwhich a Jew would ground his antipathy to the flesh of Swine is that\npassage which occurs in Lev. xi. 7: \"And the swine, though he divide\nthe hoof, and be cloven-footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is\nunclean to you.\" But the very same paragraph, of which this passage\nforms the termination, treats of other unclean beasts, such as the\nconey (or hyrax) and the hare, neither of which animals are held in\nsuch abhorrence as the Swine.\n\nThis enactment could not therefore have produced the singular feeling\nwith which the Swine were regarded by the Jews, and in all probability\nthe antipathy was of far greater antiquity than the time of Moses.\n\nHow hateful to the Jewish mind was the hog we may infer from many\npassages, several of which occur in the Book of Isaiah. See, for\nexample, lxv. 3, 4: \"A people that provoketh me to anger continually\nto my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon\naltars of brick;\n\n\"Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat\nswine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels.\"\nHere we have the people heaping one abomination upon another--the\nsacrifice to idols in the gardens, the burning of incense upon a\nforbidden altar and with strange fire, the living among the tombs,\nwhere none but madmen and evil spirits were supposed to reside, and,\nas the culminating point of iniquity, eating Swine's flesh, and\ndrinking the broth in which it was boiled.\n\nIn the next chapter, verse 3, we have another reference to the Swine.\nSpeaking of the wickedness of the people, and the uselessness of their\nsacrifices, the prophet proceeds to say: \"He that killeth an ox is as\nif he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he had cut off a\ndog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's\nblood.\" We see here how the prophet proceeds from one image to\nanother: the murder of a man, the offering of a dog instead of a lamb,\nand the pouring out of Swine's blood upon the altar instead of\nwine--the last-mentioned crime being evidently held as the worst of\nthe three. Another reference to the Swine occurs in the same chapter,\nverse 17: \"They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the\ngardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the\nabomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the\nLord.\"\n\nNot only did the Jews refuse to eat the flesh of the hog, but they\nheld in utter abomination everything that belonged to it, and would\nhave thought themselves polluted had they been even touched with a\nhog's bristle. Even at the present day this feeling has not\ndiminished, and both by Jews and Mahometans the hog is held in utter\nabhorrence.\n\nSome recent travellers have made great use of this feeling. Signor\nPierotti, for example, during his long sojourn in Palestine, found the\nflesh of the hog extremely beneficial to him. \"How often has the flesh\nof this animal supported me, especially during the earlier part of my\nstay in Palestine, before I had learned to like the mutton and the\ngoats' flesh! I give the preference to this meat because it has often\nsaved me time by rendering a fire unnecessary, and freed me from\nimportunate, dirty, and unsavoury guests, who used their hands for\nspoons, knives, and forks.\n\n\"A little piece of bacon laid conspicuously upon the cloth that served\nme for a table was always my best friend. Without this talisman I\nshould never have freed myself from unwelcome company, at least\nwithout breaking all the laws of hospitality by not inviting the\nchiefs of my escort or the guides to share my meal; a thing neither\nprudent nor safe in the open country. Therefore, on the contrary, when\nthus provided I pressed them with the utmost earnestness to eat with\nme, but of course never succeeded in persuading them; and so dined in\npeace, keeping on good terms with them, although they did call me\nbehind my back a 'dog of a Frank' for eating pork.\n\n\"Besides, I had then no fear of my stores failing, as I always took\ncare to carry a stock large enough to supply the real wants of my\nparty. So a piece of bacon was more service to me than a revolver, a\nrifle, or a sword; and I recommend all travellers in Palestine to\ncarry bacon rather than arms, for the latter are often stolen, the\nformer is never.\"\n\nSuch being the feelings of the Jews, we may conceive the abject\ndegradation to which the Prodigal Son of the parable must have\ndescended, when he was compelled to become a swine-herd for a living,\nand would have been glad even to have eaten the very husks on which\nthe Swine fed. These husks, by the way, were evidently the pods of the\nlocust-tree, or carob, of which we shall have more to say in a future\npage. We have in our language no words to express the depths of\nignominy into which this young man must have fallen, nor can we\nconceive any office which in our estimation would be so degrading as\nwould be that of swine-herd to a Jew.\n\nHow deeply rooted was the abhorrence of the Swine's flesh we can see\nfrom a passage in 2 Maccabees, in which is related a series of insults\noffered to the religion of the Jews. The temple at Jerusalem was to be\ncalled the Temple of Jupiter Olympus, and that on Gerizim was to be\ndedicated to Jupiter, the defender of strangers. The altars were\ndefiled by forbidden things, and the celebration of the Sabbath, or of\nany Jewish ceremony, was punishable with death.\n\nSevere as were all these afflictions, there was one which the Jews\nseem, from the stress laid upon it, to have felt more keenly than any\nother. This was the compulsory eating of Swine's flesh, an act which\nwas so abhorrent to the Jews that in attempting to enforce it,\nAntiochus found that he was foiled by the passive resistance offered\nto him. The Jews had allowed their temples to be dedicated to the\nworship of heathen deities, they had submitted to the deprivation of\ntheir sacred rites, they had even consented to walk in procession on\nthe Feast of Bacchus, carrying ivy like the rest of the worshippers in\nthat most licentious festival. It might be thought that any people who\nsubmit to such degradation would suffer any similar indignity. But\neven their forbearance had reached its limits, and nothing could\ninduce them to eat the flesh of Swine.\n\nSeveral examples of the resistance offered by them are recorded in the\nbook just mentioned. Eleazar, for example, a man ninety years old,\nsternly refused to partake of the abominable food. Some of the\nofficials, in compassion for his great age, advised him to take lawful\nmeat with him and to exchange it for the Swine's flesh. This he\nrefused to do, saying that his age was only a reason for particular\ncare on his part, lest the young should be led away by his example.\nHis persecutors then forced the meat into his mouth, but he rejected\nit, and died under the lash.\n\nAnother example of similar, but far greater heroism, is given by the\nsame chronicler. A mother and her seven sons were urged with blows to\neat the forbidden food, and refused to do so. Thinking that the mother\nwould not be able to endure the sight of her sons' sufferings, the\nofficers took them in succession, and inflicted a series of horrible\ntortures upon them, beginning by cutting off their tongues, hands, and\nfeet, and ending by roasting them while still alive. Their mother, far\nfrom counselling her sons to yield, even though they were bribed by\npromises of wealth and rank, only encouraged them to persevere, and,\nwhen the last of her sons was dead, passed herself through the same\nfiery trial.\n\nEven among the ancient Egyptians this repugnance to the Swine\nprevailed, though there was a sort of Pariah caste among them who bred\nthe animal and ate its flesh.\n\nThis we learn from Herodotus (\"Euterpe,\" xlvii.):--\"The Egyptians\nconsider the pig to be an impure animal, and if therefore a man in\npassing near a pig should but touch it with his clothes, he goes at\nonce to the river and plunges into it. In the next place, swine-herds,\nalthough they be native Egyptians, are the only men who are not\nallowed to enter into any of their temples, neither will any man give\nhis daughter in marriage to one of them, nor take a wife from among\nthem, but the swine-herds only marry among themselves.\n\n\"The Egyptians therefore do not think it right to sacrifice swine to\nany other deities, but to the moon and Bacchus they sacrifice them at\nthe same time; that is to say, at the same full moon, and then they\neat the flesh.... This sacrifice of pigs to the moon is performed in\nthe following manner. When the sacrificer has killed the victims, he\nputs the tip of the tail, the spleen, and the caul together, covers\nthem with the fat found in the belly of the animal, and then consumes\nit with fire. The rest of the flesh they eat during the full moon in\nwhich they offer the sacrifices, but on no other day would any man\never taste it. The poor among them, through want of money, make pigs\nout of dough; and, after baking them, offer them in sacrifice.\n\n\"On the eve of the festival of Bacchus, every one slays a pig before\nhis door, and then restores it to the swine-herd that sold it, that he\nmay carry it away. The rest of this festival to Bacchus, except as\nregards the pigs, the Egyptians celebrate much in the same manner as\nthe Greeks do.\"\n\nIt has been conjectured, and with plausibility, that the pig was\nprohibited by Moses on account of the unwholesomeness of its flesh in\na hot country, and that its almost universal repudiation in such lands\nis a proof of its unfitness for food. In countries where diseases of\nthe skin are so common, and where the dreaded leprosy still maintains\nits hold, the flesh of the pig is thought, whether rightly or wrongly,\nto increase the tendency to such diseases, and on that account alone\nwould be avoided.\n\nIt has, however, been shown that the flesh of Swine can be habitually\nconsumed in hot countries without producing any evil results; and,\nmoreover, that the prohibition of Moses was not confined to the Swine,\nbut included many other animals whose flesh is used without scruple by\nthose very persons who reject that of the pig.\n\nKnowing the deep hatred of the Jews towards this animal, we may\nnaturally wonder how we come to hear of herds of Swine kept in Jewish\nlands.\n\nOf this custom there is a familiar example in the herd of Swine that\nwas drowned in the sea (Matt. viii. 28-34). It is an open question\nwhether those who possessed the Swine were Jews of lax principles, who\ndisregarded the Law for the sake of gain, or whether they were\nGentiles, who, of course, were not bound by the Law. The former seems\nthe likelier interpretation, the destruction of the Swine being a\nfitting punishment for their owners. It must be here remarked, that\nour Lord did not, as is often said, destroy the Swine, neither did He\nsend the devils into them, so that the death of these animals cannot\nbe reckoned as one of the divine miracles. Ejecting the evil spirits\nfrom the maniacs was an exercise of His divine authority; the\ndestruction of the Swine was a manifestation of diabolical anger,\npermitted, but not dictated.\n\nThe scene of so remarkable an event is naturally of great interest,\nespecially as the statements of the Evangelists who mention it do not\nprecisely agree. This subject is so well treated by Mr. Tristram in\nhis \"Land of Israel,\" that it must be given in his own words:--\n\n\"The field of the tombs at Gadara presents a vivid illustration of the\ncircumstances connected with the healing of the demoniac in the\ncountry of the Gadarenes, or Gergesenes. With one exception, all the\nconcomitant events of the miracle are exactly illustrated. We have\nbeyond the city the field of tombs, these tombs suited for the refuge\nof demoniac outcasts, occupied as dwellings to the present day. We\nhave a plain suited for the feeding of swine, with its roots and\nacorns, and we have a steep place hard by, of several hundred feet\nhigh, [Greek: kr\u00eamnon]. But then, it does not run down to the sea, but\nto the little river. This objection is, I think, fatal to the\nidentification of Um Keis with the scene of the miracle.\n\n\"St. Mark (v. 2) tells us that our Lord was met _immediately_ on His\ncoming out of the ship. This place is three and a half hours distant\nfrom its shores. It is important also to observe that St. Matthew\n(viii. 28) reads not Gadarenes, but Gergesenes, and St. Luke states\nthat the coast of the Gadarenes was over against Galilee (viii. 26). I\nshould feel thereupon disposed fully to endorse the suggestion of Dr.\nThomson, that St. Matthew, writing for those intimately acquainted\nwith the topography of the country in detail, names the obscure and\nexact locality, _Gergesa_; while SS. Mark and Luke, writing for those\nat a distance, simply name the country of Gadara, as being a place of\nimportance, and the acknowledged capital of the district. This is\nborne out by the statement of Josephus ('Bell. Jud.' 1, viii. 35).\n\n\"Dr. Thomson visited, at the mouth of the Wady Semakh, directly\nopposite Gennesaret, some ruins called by his guide _Kerza_, or\n_Gerza_, which he identifies with the Gergesa of St. Matthew. The\ndiscovery is most interesting and important. I visited the place\nmyself from a boat, and observed the remains of a valley and a khan;\nbut, unfortunately, I was not aware at the time of the interest\nattaching to the place, and did not ascertain, or at least note down,\nthe name given to it by my boatmen.\n\n\"The statement of Origen exactly bears out the discovery of Dr.\nThomson. After stating that Gadara was not the scene of the miracle,\nfor these was thence no steep place into the sea, he states that\nGergesa is an ancient city on the shores of the lake, by which is a\nsteep place which runs down to it. In one important particular my\nmemory corroborates the statement of Dr. Thomson, viz. that while\nthere is here no precipice running sheer to the shore, but a narrow\nbelt of land, the cliff behind is steep, and the sea so narrow, that a\nherd of swine, rushing frantically down, must certainly have been\noverwhelmed in the sea before they could recover themselves.\n\n\"While the tombs at Gadara are peculiarly interesting and remarkable,\nyet the whole region is so perforated everywhere by rock-chambers of\nthe dead that we may be quite certain that a home for the demoniac\nwill not be wanting whatever locality be assigned for the events\nrecorded by the Evangelists.\"\n\nAlthough that part of the country is well suited for feeding Swine,\nthe animals are no longer kept. In the first place, there is a great\nwant of spirit in matters of commerce; and in the second, the country\nis so unsettled that the merchants would probably be robbed. The\nwoods, moreover, furnish nowadays but a scanty supply of acorns, and\nthose are eaten by the Arabs instead of being given to pigs.\n\nThese animals are at the present day much neglected, because the\nMahometans and Jews may not eat the flesh, and the Christians, as a\nrule, abstain from it, so that they may not hurt the feelings of their\nneighbours. Pigs are however reared in the various monasteries, and by\nthe Arabs attached to them; the former eating the hog, and the latter\nonly breeding it for sale. Signor Pierotti states that the pigs become\nas part of the family, who live and grow fat together with them.\nThough, he remarks, they are not so intelligent as those that listened\nto St. Anthony preaching in the Thebaid, they play with the children,\nunderstand the language of their masters, and do not disdain to play\nwith the fowls, dogs, cats, asses, and horses, and are much more\nnimble than their European brethren, although they are smaller in size\nand not so spirited.\n\nAlthough the pig was so detested by the Jews, they were evidently well\nacquainted with it. St. Peter, for example, in his Second Epistle,\nchap. ii. 22, refers to the habit of wallowing in the mire, a custom\nwhich is common to all the pachydermatous animals, which, in spite of\ntheir thick hide, are very sensitive to the attacks of flies, and\ncover themselves with mud in order to defend themselves against their\ntiny but dreaded enemies.\n\nIn connexion with the Swine, there is a passage in the Proverbs which\nrequires a slight comment. It occurs in chap. xi. 22: \"As a jewel (or\npendant) of gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman which is\nwithout discretion.\" The sacred writer refers here to the custom\nadopted by Oriental women of wearing a ring in the nostril--a custom\nwhich has existed to the present day, and is familiar to all those who\nhave travelled in the East. The plan which is generally adopted is\nthat of boring a hole through the nostril, passing a ring through it,\nand, when the wound has healed, hanging various jewels and other\nornaments upon the ring, so as to constitute the \"pendant of gold\"\nmentioned in the proverb.\n\nThe image used by our Lord of casting pearls before Swine needs no\nexplanation.\n\nWe now come to the wild animal. Their is only one passage in the\nScriptures in which the WILD BOAR is definitely mentioned, and another\nin which a reference is made to it in a paraphrase.\n\nThe former of these is the well-known verse of the Psalms: \"Why hast\nthou broken down her hedges, so that all they which pass by the way do\npluck her?\n\n\"The boar out of the wood doth waste it, and the wild beast of the\nfield doth devour it\" (Ps. lxxx. 12, 13). The second passage is to be\nfound in Ps. lxviii. 30. In the Authorized Version it is thus\nrendered: \"Rebuke the company of spearmen, the multitude of bulls,\nwith the calves of the people.\" If the reader will refer to the\nmarginal translation (which, it must be remarked, is of equal\nauthority with the text), the passage runs thus: \"Rebuke the beasts of\nthe reeds,\" &c. Now, this is undoubtedly the correct rendering, and is\naccepted in the Jewish Bible.\n\nHaving quoted these two passages, we will proceed to the description\nand character of the animal.\n\nIn the former times, the Wild Boar was necessarily much more plentiful\nthan is the case in these days, owing to the greater abundance of\nwoods, many of which have disappeared by degrees, and others been\ngreatly thinned by the encroachments of mankind. Woods and reed-beds\nare always the habitations of the Wild Boar, which resides in these\nfastnesses, and seems always to prefer the reed-bed to the wood,\nprobably because it can find plenty of mud, in which it wallows after\nthe fashion of its kind. There is no doubt whatever that the \"beast of\nthe reeds\" is simply a poetical phrase for the Wild Boar.\n\nIf there should be any cultivated ground in the neighbourhood, the\nBoar is sure to sally out and do enormous damage to the crops. It is\nperhaps more dreaded in the vineyards than in any other ground, as it\nnot only devours the grapes, but tears down and destroys the vines,\ntrampling them under foot, and destroying a hundredfold as much as it\neats.\n\n [Illustration: WILD BOAR OF PALESTINE.\n\n \"The Boar out of the wood doth waste it.\"--PS. lxxx. 13.]\n\nIf the reader will refer again to Ps. lxxx. he will see that the\nJewish nation is described under the image of a vine: \"Thou hast\nbrought a vine out of Egypt: Thou hast cast out the heathen and\nplanted it,\" &c. No image of a destructive enemy could therefore\nbe more appropriate than that which is used. We have read of\nthe little foxes that spoil the vines, but the Wild Boar is a much\nmore destructive enemy, breaking its way through the fences, rooting\nup the ground, tearing down the vines themselves, and treading them\nunder its feet. A single party of these animals will sometimes destroy\nan entire vineyard in a single night.\n\nWe can well imagine the damage that would be done to a vineyard even\nby the domesticated Swine, but the Wild Boar is infinitely more\ndestructive. It is of very great size, often resembling a donkey\nrather than a boar, and is swift and active beyond conception. The\nWild Boar is scarcely recognisable as the very near relation of the\ndomestic species. It runs with such speed, that a high-bred horse\nfinds some difficulty in overtaking it, while an indifferent steed\nwould be left hopelessly behind. Even on level ground the hunter has\nhard work to overtake it; and if it can get upon broken or hilly\nground, no horse can catch it. The Wild Boar can leap to a\nconsiderable distance, and can wheel and turn when at full speed, with\nan agility that makes it a singularly dangerous foe. Indeed, the\ninhabitants of countries where the Wild Boar flourishes would as soon\nface a lion as one of these animals, the stroke of whose razor-like\ntusks is made with lightning swiftness, and which is sufficient to rip\nup a horse, and cut a dog nearly asunder.\n\nAlthough the Wild Boar is not as plentiful in Palestine as used to be\nthe case, it is still found in considerable numbers. Whenever the\ninhabitants can contrive to cut off the retreat of marauding parties\namong the crops, they turn out for a general hunt, and kill as many as\nthey can manage to slay. After one of these hunts, the bodies are\nmostly exposed for sale, but, as the demand for them is very small,\nthey can be purchased at a very cheap rate. Signor Pierotti bought one\nin the plains of Jericho for five shillings. For the few who may eat\nthe hog, this is a fortunate circumstance, the flesh being very\nexcellent, and as superior to ordinary pork as is a pheasant to a\nbarn-door fowl, or venison to mutton.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ELEPHANT.\n\n The Elephant indirectly mentioned in the Authorized\n Version--Solomon's ivory throne--Ivory used in Egypt--Horns of\n ivory--The ivory palaces--Beds of ivory--The Tyrian ships--Ivory\n mentioned by Homer--Vessels of ivory--The Elephant as an engine\n of war--Antiochus and his Elephants--Oriental\n exaggeration--Self-devotion of Eleazar--Attacking the Elephants,\n and their gradual abandonment in war--The Talmudical writers on\n the Elephant--A funeral and an omen.\n\n\nExcept indirectly, the Elephant is never mentioned in the Authorized\nVersion of the Canonical Scriptures, although frequent references are\nmade to ivory, the product of that animal.\n\nThe earliest mention of ivory in the Scriptures is to be found in 1\nKings x. 18: \"Moreover the king (_i.e._ Solomon) made a great throne\nof ivory, and overlaid it with the best gold.\" This passage forms a\nportion of the description given by the sacred historian of the\nglories of Solomon's palace, of which this celebrated throne, with the\nsix steps and the twelve lions on the steps, was the central and most\nmagnificent object. It is named together with the three hundred golden\nshields, the golden vessel of the royal palace, and the wonderful\narched viaduct crossing the valley of the Tyropoeon, \"the ascent by\nwhich he went up unto the house of the Lord,\" all of which glories so\novercame the Queen of Sheba that \"there was no more spirit in her.\"\n\nWe see, therefore, that in the time of Solomon ivory was so precious\nan article that it was named among the chief of the wonders to be seen\nin the palace of Solomon, the wealthiest and most magnificent monarch\nof sacred or profane history.\n\nThat it should not have been previously mentioned is very singular.\nFive hundred years had elapsed since the Israelites escaped from the\npower of Egypt, and during the whole of that time, though gold and\nsilver and precious stones and costly raiment are repeatedly\nmentioned, we do not find a single passage in which any allusion is\nmade to ivory. Had we not known that ivory was largely used among the\nEgyptians, such an omission would cause no surprise. But the\nresearches of modern travellers have brought to light many articles of\nivory that were in actual use in Egypt, and we therefore cannot but\nwonder that a material so valued and so beautiful does not seem to\nhave been reckoned among the treasures which were brought by the\nIsraelites from the land of their captivity, and which were so\nabundant that the Tabernacle was entirely formed of them.\n\nIn the various collections of Europe are many specimens of ivory used\nby the ancient Egyptians, among the chief of which may be mentioned an\nivory box in the Louvre, having on its lid the name of the dynasty in\nwhich it was carved, and the ivory-tipped lynch-pins of the splendid\nwar-chariot in Florence, from which the illustration on page 260 has\nbeen drawn.\n\nThe ivory used by the Egyptians was, of course, that of the African\nElephant; and was obtained chiefly from Ethiopia, as we find in\nHerodotus (\"Thalia,\" 114):--\"Where the meridian declines towards the\nsetting sun, the Ethiopian territory reaches, being the extreme part\nof the habitable world. It produces much gold, huge elephants, wild\ntrees of all kinds, ebony, and men of large stature, very handsome and\nlong-lived.\"\n\nSolomon may have procured from the same source part of the ivory which\nhe used so lavishly, but it is evident that he was also supplied from\nIndia. In 1 Kings x. 22 we read: \"For the king had at sea a navy of\nTharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of\nTharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.\"\nThe reader will remark that an opinion has already been expressed that\nthe country whence these articles were brought must be India, and this\nconjecture is strengthened by the Hebrew names given to the apes, the\npeacocks, and the ivory, which are almost identical with the words\nemployed in the Cingalese language of the present day.\n\nThe usual Hebrew word for ivory is _shen_, i.e. a tooth, the\nIsraelites being perfectly aware that it was the product of a tooth,\nand not of a horn. It is true that in one passage the word \"horn\" is\nused in connexion with the term \"ivory,\" or \"tooth,\" in such a manner\nthat a reader of the English Version might imagine the sacred writers\nto think that ivory was obtained from the horn of some animal. This\npassage occurs in the prophet Ezekiel, xxvii. 15. Speaking of Tyre and\nher greatness, the prophet uses the following terms: \"The men of Dedan\nwere thy merchants; many isles were the merchandise of thine hand:\nthey brought thee for a present horns of ivory and ebony.\"\n\nIf we refer to the Hebrew Bible, we shall find that the literal\ntranslation of this passage runs as follows: \"The men of Dedan were\nthy traders; many maritime settlements were the merchandise of thine\nhand: they offered thee as a price horns of teeth and ebony.\" It is\nevident that the word _kerenoth_, or horns, is used to represent the\nhorn-like shape of the Elephant's tusk, as it appears when imported\ninto the country, the use of the term _shen_, or tooth, showing that\nthe shape and not material is to be implied by the term.\n\nNow if the reader will look at a passage which has already been quoted\n(1 Kings x. 22), he will see that the marginal reading translates the\nword \"ivory\" as \"elephants' teeth.\" This rendering is undoubtedly the\ncorrect one. The Hebrew word is _shen-habbim_, and there is little, if\nany, doubt that the term _habbim_ is rightly translated as\n\"elephants.\" A similar word, _Habba_, is found in the Assyrian\ninscriptions, and is thought by Sir H. Rawlinson to have the same\nsignification.\n\nIt will be as well to mention here a curious version of Gen. 1. 1, in\nwhich Joseph is said to have placed the body of his father upon a bier\nof _shin-daphin_, or ivory.\n\nAfter the passage in 1 Kings, ivory is repeatedly mentioned, sometimes\nin allusion to its smoothness and whiteness, and sometimes to its use\nas a luxurious appendage of the palace. For its use in the former\nsense, we may take the well-known passage in the Song of Solomon: \"His\nhands are as gold rings set with the beryl: his belly is as bright\nivory overlaid with sapphires\" (Cant. v. 14). Also vii. 4, \"Thy neck\nis as a tower of ivory.\"\n\nFor its use in the second of these senses we may take several\npassages. See, for example, Ps. xlv. 8: \"All thy garments smell of\nmyrrh, aloes, and cassia, out of the ivory palaces, whereby they have\nmade thee glad.\" It has been suggested that the words \"ivory palaces\"\nmay signify boxes or chests inlaid with ivory, in which were deposited\nthe royal garments, together with perfumes. Whether or not this be the\ncase, it is evident that the ivory is here mentioned as a costly\nadjunct of royal luxury.\n\nThere are, however, passages in which ivory is distinctly mentioned as\nforming part of the adornment of houses. For example, see 1 Kings\nxxii. 39: \"Now the rest of the acts of Ahab, and all that he did, and\nthe ivory house which he made, are they not written in the book of the\nchronicles of the kings of Israel?\" The \"ivory house\" could not, of\ncourse, be built wholly of ivory, and it is evident that by the term\nis signified a palace, the rooms of which were inlaid with ivory.\nAnother mention of such houses is made in Amos iii. 15: \"And I will\nsmite the winter house with the summer house; and the houses of ivory\nshall perish, and the great houses shall have an end, saith the Lord.\"\n\nChambers thus decorated are to be seen at the present day, and it is\nremarkable that ivory is still used, together with ebony, in panelling\nthe walls of rooms--a combination which is mentioned in several of the\npassages which have already been quoted.\n\nThe use of ivory as an article of luxury is also mentioned in Amos vi.\n4: \"Woe to them ... that lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch\nthemselves upon their couches.\" And in Ezekiel xxvii. 6, the\noverwhelming wealth and luxury of Tyre are pictured by the costly\nmaterials of which the Assyrians built their ships--the planks of\nSenir fir, the masts of cedar, the oars of Bashan oak, the sails of\nfine linen, and the very benches on which the rowers sat, inlaid with\nivory. How accurate was the prophet in the details of his bodings, is\nshown by the research of Mr. Layard, who found among the buried ruins\nof Nineveh great quantities of ivory, some manufactured, and some in\nits original state as imported--the uncut tusks, or \"horns of ivory,\"\nto which reference has already been made.\n\nThe classical reader need scarcely be reminded of the parallel between\npassages of Scripture and those of profane authors, in which ivory is\nmentioned as a costly ornament. See, for example, the Iliad, book v.\n484:--\n\n \"From his numbed hands the iv'ry studded reins,\n Dropped in the dust, are trailed along the plains.\"\n\n (_Lines_ 712, 713, POPE'S _Version_.)\n\nIn ancient Greece, as well as in Assyria, the beds of the wealthy were\nadorned with ivory. Ulysses, for example (see Odyssey, book xxi.),\nking as he was, made his own bridal bed of hide thongs interlaced, and\ninlaid the posts with gold, ivory, and silver. And, in the beginning\nof the same book, we find that the key of the royal armoury was made\nof brass inlaid with ivory.\n\nThere is only one passage in the New Testament in which ivory is\nmentioned: \"And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over\nher, for no man buyeth their merchandise any more; the merchandise of\ngold, and silver, and precious stones, ... and all manner vessels of\nivory.\" (Rev. xviii. 11, 12.)\n\n\nHaving now examined the passages in which ivory is mentioned, we turn\nto those in which the Elephant itself is named. These are only to be\nfound in the Apocrypha, and in all of them the Elephant is described\nas an engine of war. If the reader will refer to the First Book of the\nMaccabees, he will find that the Elephant is mentioned at the very\ncommencement of the book. \"Now when the kingdom was established before\nAntiochus, he thought to reign over Egypt, that he might have the\ndominion of two realms.\n\n\"Wherefore he entered into Egypt with a great multitude, with\nchariots, and elephants, and horsemen, and a great navy.\" (i. 16, 17.)\n\nHere we see that the Elephant was considered as a most potent engine\nof war, and, as we may perceive by the context, the King of Egypt was\nso alarmed by the invading force, that he ran away, and allowed\nAntiochus to take possession of the country.\n\nAfter this, Antiochus Eupator marched against Jerusalem with a vast\narmy, which is thus described in detail:--\"The number of his army was\none hundred thousand footmen, and twenty thousand horsemen, and two\nand thirty elephants exercised in battle.\n\n\"And to the end that they might provoke the elephants to fight, they\nshowed them the blood of grapes and mulberries.\n\n\"Moreover, they divided the beasts among the armies, and for every\nelephant they appointed a thousand men, armed with coats of mail, and\nwith helmets of brass on their heads; and, besides this, for every\nbeast were ordained five hundred horsemen of the best.\n\n\"These were ready at every occasion wheresoever the beast was; and\nwhithersoever the beast went they went also, neither departed they\nfrom him.\n\n\"And upon the beasts were there strong towers of wood, which covered\nevery one of them, and were girt fast unto them with devices; there\nwere also upon every one two and thirty strong men that fought upon\nthem, beside the Indian that ruled him.\n\n\"As for the remnant of the horsemen, they set them on this side and\nthat side at the two fronts of the host, giving them signs what to do,\nand being harnessed all over amidst the ranks.\" (1 Macc. vi. 30, &c.)\n\nIt is evident from this description that, in the opinion of the\nwriter, the Elephants formed the principal arms of the opposing force,\nthese animals being prominently mentioned, and the rest of the army\nbeing reckoned as merely subsidiaries of the terrible beasts. The\nthirty-two Elephants appear to have taken such a hold of the\nnarrator's mind, that he evidently looked upon them in the same light\nthat the ancient Jews regarded chariots of war, or as at the present\nday savages regard artillery. According to his ideas, the thirty-two\nElephants constituted the real army, the hundred thousand infantry and\ntwenty thousand cavalry being only in attendance upon these animals.\n\nTaken as a whole, the description of the war Elephant is a good one,\nthough slightly exaggerated, and is evidently written by an\neye-witness. The mention of the native mahout, or \"Indian that guided\nhim,\" is characteristic enough, as is the account of the howdah, or\nwooden carriage on the back of the animal.\n\nThe number of warriors, however, is evidently exaggerated, though not\nto such an extent as the account of Julius C\u00e6sar's Elephants, which\nare said to have carried on their backs sixty soldiers, beside the\nwooden tower in which they fought. It is evident that, in the first\nplace, no Elephant could carry a tower large enough to hold so many\nfighting men, much less one which would afford space for them to use\ntheir weapons.\n\nA good account of the fighting Elephant is given by Topsel (p.\n157):--\"There were certain officers and guides of the Elephants, who\nwere called _Elephantarch\u00e6_, who were the governors of sixteen\nElephants, and they which did institute and teach them martial\ndiscipline were called _Elephantagogi_.\n\n\"The Military Elephant did carry four persons on his bare back, one\nfighting on the right hand, another fighting on the left hand, a\nthird, which stood fighting backwards from the Elephant's head, and a\nfourth in the middle of these, holding the rains, and guiding the\nBeast to the discretion of the Souldiers, even as the Pilot in a ship\nguideth the stem, wherein was required an equall knowledge and\ndexterity; for when the Indian which ruled them said, Strike here on\nthe right hand, or else on the left, or refrain and stand still, no\nreasonable man could yield readier obedience.\"\n\nThis description is really a very accurate as well as spirited one,\nand conveys a good idea of the fighting Elephant as it appeared when\nbrought into action.\n\nStrangely enough, after giving this temperate and really excellent\naccount of the war Elephant, the writer seems to have been unable to\nresist the fascination of his theme, and proceeds to describe, with\ngreat truth and spirit, the mode of fighting adopted by the animal,\nintermixed with a considerable amount of the exaggeration from which\nthe former part of his account is free.\n\n\"They did fasten iron chains, first of all, upon the Elephant that was\nto bear ten, fifteen, twenty, or thirty men, on either side two\npanniers of iron bound underneath their belly, and upon them the like\npanniers of wood, hollow, wherein they placed their men at armes, and\ncovered them over with small boards (for the trunck of the Elephant\nwas covered with a mail for defence, and upon that a broadsword, two\ncubits long); this (as also the wooden Castle, or pannier aforesaid)\nwere fastened first to the neck and then to the rump of the Elephant.\n\n\"Being thus armed, they entered the battel, and they shewed unto the\nBeasts, to make them more fierce, wine, liquor made of Rice, and white\ncloth, for at the sight of any of these his courage and rage\nincreaseth above all measure. Then at the sound of the Trumpet, he\nbeginneth with teeth to strike, tear, beat, spoil, take up into the\nair, cast down again, stamp upon men under feet, overthrow with his\ntrunck, and make way for his riders to pierce with Spear, Shield, and\nSword; so that his horrible voice, his wonderful body, his terrible\nforce, his admirable skill, his ready and inestimable obedience, and\nhis strange and seldom-seen shape, produced in a main battel no mean\naccidents and overturns.\"\n\nIn this account there is a curious mixture of truth and exaggeration.\nAs we have already seen, the number of soldiers which the animal was\nsupposed to carry is greatly exaggerated, and it is rather amusing to\nnote how the \"towers\" in which they fought are modified into\n\"panniers.\" Then the method by which the animal is incited to the\ncombat is partly true, and partly false. Of course an Elephant is not\nangered by seeing a piece of white cloth, or by looking at wine, or a\nliquor made of rice.\n\nBut that the wine, or the \"liquor made of rice,\" _i.e._ arrack, was\nadministered to the Elephant before it was brought into the\nbattle-field, is likely enough. Elephants are wonderfully fond of\nstrong drink. They can be incited to perform any task within their\npowers by a provision of arrack, and when stimulated by a plentiful\nsupply of their favourite drink they would be in good fighting\ncondition.\n\nNext we find the writer describing the Elephant as being furnished\nwith a coating of mail armour on its proboscis, the end of which was\narmed with a sword a yard in length. Now any one who is acquainted\nwith the Elephant will see at once that such offensive and defensive\narmour would deprive the animal of the full use of the proboscis, and\nwould, therefore, only weaken, and not strengthen, its use in battle.\nAccordingly we find that the writer, when describing with perfect\naccuracy the mode in which the Elephant fights, utterly omits all\nmention of the sword and the mailed proboscis, and describes the\nanimal, not as striking or thrusting with the sword, but as\noverthrowing with the trunk, taking up into the air, and casting down\nagain--acts which could only be performed when the proboscis was\nunencumbered by armour. The use of weapons was left to the soldiers\nthat fought upon its back, the principal object of the huge animal\nbeing to trample its way through the opposing ranks, and to make a way\nfor the soldiers that followed.\n\nIt may be easily imagined that, before soldiers become familiarized\nwith the appearance of the Elephant, they might be pardoned for being\npanic-struck at the sight of so strange an animal. Not only was it\nformidable for its vast size, and for the armed men which it carried,\nbut for the obedience which it rendered to its keeper, and the skill\nwith which it wielded the strange but powerful weapon with which\nNature had armed it.\n\nAt first, the very approach of so terrible a foe struck consternation\ninto the soldiers, who knew of no mode by which they could oppose the\ngigantic beast, which came on in its swift, swinging pace, crushing\nits way by sheer weight through the ranks, and striking right and left\nwith its proboscis. No other method of checking the Elephant, except\nby self-sacrifice, could be found; and in 1 Macc. vi. 43-46, we read\nhow Eleazar, the son of Mattathias, nobly devoted himself for his\ncountry.\n\n\"Eleazar also, surnamed Savaran, perceiving that one of the beasts,\narmed with royal harness, was higher than all the rest, and supposing\nthat the king was upon him.\n\n\"Put himself in jeopardy, to the end he might deliver his people, and\nget him a perpetual name.\n\n\"Whereupon he ran upon him courageously, through the midst of the\nbattle, slaying on the right hand and on the left, so that they were\ndivided from him on both sides.\n\n\"Which done, he crept under the elephant, and thrust him under, and\nslew him; whereupon the elephant fell down upon him, and he died.\"\n\nI may here mention that the surname of Savaran, or Avaran, as it ought\nto be called, signifies one who pierces an animal from behind, and was\ngiven to him after his death, in honour of his exploit.\n\nAt first, then, Elephants were the most formidable engines of war that\ncould be brought into the battle-field, and the very sight of these\nhuge beasts, towering above even the helmets of the cavalry,\ndisheartened the enemy so much that victory became easy.\n\nAfter a while, however, when time for reflection had been allowed, the\nmore intellectual among the soldiers began to think that, after all,\nthe Elephant was not a mere engine, but a living animal, and, as such,\nsubject to the infirmities of the lower animals. So they invented\nscheme after scheme, by which they baffled the attacks of these once\ndreaded foes, and sometimes even succeeded in driving them back among\nthe ranks of their own soldiery, so maddened with pain and anger,\nthat they dealt destruction among the soldiers for whom they were\nfighting, and so broke up their order of battle that the foe easily\novercame them.\n\nThe vulnerable nature of the proboscis was soon discovered, and\nsoldiers were armed with very sharp swords, set on long handles, with\nwhich they continually attacked the Elephants' trunks. Others were\nmounted on swift horses, dashed past the Elephant, and hurled their\ndarts before the animal could strike them. Others, again, were placed\nin chariots, and armed with very long and sharply-pointed spears.\nSeveral of these chariots would be driven simultaneously against an\nElephant, and sometimes succeeded in killing the animal. Slingers also\nwere told off for the express purpose of clearing the \"castles,\" or\nhowdahs, of the soldiers who fought on the Elephants' backs, and their\nespecial object was the native mahout, who sat on the animal's neck.\n\nSometimes they made way for the Elephant as it pressed forward, and\nthen closed round it, so as to make it the central mark, on which\nconverged a hail of javelins, arrows, and stones on every side, until\nthe huge animal sank beneath its many wounds. By degrees, therefore,\nthe Elephant was found to be so uncertain an engine of war, that its\nuse was gradually discontinued, and finally abandoned altogether.\n\n\nThe Elephant which was employed in these wars was the Indian species,\n_Elephas Indicus_, which is thought to be more susceptible of\neducation than the African Elephant. The latter, however, has been\ntamed, and, in the days of Rome's greatest splendour, was taught to\nperform a series of tricks that seem almost incredible. As, however,\nthe Indian species is that with which we have here to do, I have\nselected it for the illustration.\n\nIt may be at once distinguished from its African relative by the\ncomparatively small ears, those of the African Elephant reaching above\nthe back of the head, and drooping well below the neck. The shape of\nthe head, too, is different. In the Indian species, only the males\nbear tusks, and even many of them are unarmed. In the African species,\nhowever, both sexes bear tusks, those of the male furnishing the best\nivory, with its peculiar creamy colour and beautiful graining, and\nthose of the female being smaller in size, and producing ivory of a\nmuch inferior quality.\n\n [Illustration: INDIAN ELEPHANT\n\n \"They brought thee for a present horns of Ivory\"--EZ. xxvii. 15.]\n\nThe Talmudical writers have not much to say about the Elephant, and\nwhat they do say is rather ludicrous than otherwise. The proboscis,\nsay they, gives the animal a very ugly look, so that to dream of the\ntrunk of an Elephant is a bad omen. Indeed, it is so odd a substitute\nfor a nose, that when people look at it they say, \"Praised be He who\ncan thus transform His creatures.\"\n\nLargest and strongest of earth's inhabitants, the Elephant is yet\nafraid of the smallest. The gnat attacks him, flies into the open end\nof the proboscis, and sucks his blood at its ease.\n\nIt is rather remarkable that there is an ironical adage respecting the\nElephant and the eye of the needle, exactly similar to the familiar\nproverb of the camel and the needle's eye.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CONEY, OR HYRAX.\n\n The Shaphan of Scripture, and the correct meaning of the\n word--Identification of the Shaphan with the Syrian\n Hyrax--Description of the animal--Its feet, teeth, and apparent\n rumination--Passages in which the Coney is mentioned--Habits of\n the animal--Its activity and wariness--The South African Hyrax,\n and its mode of life--Difficulty of procuring it--Similarity in\n appearance and habits of the Syrian species--Three species of\n Hyrax known to naturalists--The Talmudical writers on the\n Shaphan--The jerboa and the rabbit--A curious speculation and a\n judicious compromise.\n\n\nAmong the many animals mentioned in the Bible, there is one which is\nevidently of some importance in the Jewish code, inasmuch as it is\ntwice named in the Mosaic law.\n\nThat it was also familiar to the Jews is evident from other references\nwhich are made to its habits. This animal is the Shaphan of the Hebrew\nlanguage, a word which has very wrongly been translated in the\nAuthorized Version as Coney, _i.e._ Rabbit, the creature in question\nnot being a rabbit, nor even a rodent. No rabbit has ever been\ndiscovered in Palestine, and naturalists have agreed that the\ntrue Coney or Rabbit has never inhabited the Holy Land. There\nis no doubt that the Shaphan of the Hebrew Scripture, and the Coney of\nthe Vulgate, was the SYRIAN HYRAX (_Hyrax Syriacus_). This little\nanimal is rather larger than an ordinary rabbit, is not unlike it in\nappearance, and has many of its habits. It is clothed with brown fur,\nit is very active, it inhabits holes and clefts in rocks, and it has\nin the front of its mouth long chisel-shaped teeth, very much like\nthose of the rabbit. Consequently, it was classed by naturalists among\nthe rodents for many years, under the name of Rock Rabbit. Yet, as I\nhave already mentioned, it is not even a rodent, but belongs to the\npachydermatous group of animals, and occupies an intermediate place\nbetween the rhinoceros and the hippopotamus.\n\n [Illustration: THE HYRAX.\n\n \"_The Conies are but a feeble folk, yet make they their houses in the\n rocks._\"--PROV. xxx. 26.]\n\nIf it be examined carefully, the rodent-like teeth will be seen to\nresemble exactly the long curved tusks of the hippopotamus, with\ntheir sharp and chisel-edged tips; the little feet, on a close\ninspection, are seen to be furnished with a set of tiny hoofs just\nlike those of the rhinoceros; and there are many other points in its\nstructure which, to the eye of a naturalist, point out its true place\nin nature.\n\nIn common with the rodents, and other animals which have\nsimilarly-shaped teeth, the Hyrax, when at rest, is continually\nworking its jaws from side to side, a movement which it instinctively\nperforms, in order that the chiselled edges of the upper and lower\nteeth may be preserved sharp by continually rubbing against each\nother, and that they may not be suffered to grow too long, and so to\ndeprive the animal of the means whereby it gains its food. But for\nthis peculiar movement, which looks very like the action of\nruminating, the teeth would grow far beyond the mouth, as they rapidly\ndeposit dental material in their bases in order to supply the waste\ncaused at their tips by the continual friction of the edges against\neach other.\n\nIt may seem strange that an animal which is classed with the elephant,\nthe rhinoceros, and the hippopotamus, all bare-skinned animals, should\nbe clothed with a furry coat. The reader may perhaps remember that the\nHyrax does not afford a solitary instance of this structure, and that,\nalthough the elephants of our day have only a few bristly hairs thinly\nscattered over the body, those of former days were clad in a thick and\ntreble coat of fur and hair.\n\n\nThere are four passages of Scripture in which the Coney is\nmentioned--two in which it is prohibited as food, and two in which\nallusion is made to its manner of life. In order to understand the\nsubject better, we will take them in their order.\n\nThe first mention of the Coney occurs in Leviticus xi. 5, among the\nlist of clean and unclean animals: \"The coney, because he cheweth the\ncud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.\" The second is\nof a like nature, and is to be found in Deut. xiv. 7: \"These ye shall\nnot eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the cloven\nhoof; as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the\ncud, but divide not the hoof; therefore they are unclean unto you.\"\n\nThe remaining passages, which describe the habits of the Coney, are as\nfollow. The first alludes to the rock-loving habits of the animal:\n\"The high hills are a refuge for the wild goats, and the rocks for the\nconies.\" (Ps. civ. 18.) The second makes a similar mention of the\nlocalities which the animal frequents, and in addition speaks of its\nwariness, including it among the \"four things which are little upon\nthe earth, but they are exceedingly wise.\" The four are the ants, the\nlocusts, the spiders, and the Conies, which \"are but a feeble folk,\nyet make they their houses in the rocks.\"\n\nWe will take these passages in their order.\n\nIt has already been mentioned that the Hyrax, a true pachyderm, does\nnot merely chew the cud, but that the peculiar and constant movement\nof its jaws strongly resembles the act of rumination. The Jews,\nignorant as they were of scientific zoology, would naturally set down\nthe Hyrax as a ruminant, and would have been likely to eat it, as its\nflesh is very good. It must be remembered that two conditions were\nneedful to render an animal fit to be eaten by a Jew, the one that it\nmust be a ruminant, and the second that it should have a divided hoof.\nGranting, therefore, the presence of the former qualification, Moses\npoints out the absence of the latter, thereby prohibiting the animal\nas effectually as if he had entered into a question of comparative\nanatomy, and proved that the Hyrax was incapable of rumination.\n\nWe now come to the habits of the animal.\n\nAs we may gather from the passages of Scripture which have already\nbeen mentioned, the Hyrax inhabits rocky places, and lives in the\nclefts that are always found in such localities. It is an exceedingly\nactive creature, leaping from rock to rock with wonderful rapidity,\nits little sharp hoofs giving it a firm hold of the hard and irregular\nsurface of the stony ground. Even in captivity it retains much of its\nactivity, and flies about its cage with a rapidity that seems more\nsuitable to a squirrel than to an animal allied to the rhinoceros and\nhippopotamus.\n\nThere are several species--perhaps only varieties--of the Hyrax, all\nof them identical in habits, and almost precisely similar in\nappearance. The best known of these animals is that which inhabits\nSouthern Africa (_Hyrax Capensis_), and which is familiar to the\ncolonists by its name of Klip-das, or Rock-rabbit. In situations which\nsuit it, the Hyrax is very plentiful, and is much hunted by the\nnatives, who esteem its flesh very highly. Small and insignificant as\nit appears to be, even Europeans think that to kill the Hyrax is a\ntolerable test of sportsmanship, the wariness of the animal being so\ngreat that much hunter's craft is required to approach it.\n\nThe following account of the Hyrax has been furnished to me by\nLt.-Col. A. W. Drayson, R.A.:--\"In the Cape Colony, and over a great\nportion of Southern Africa, this little creature is found. It is\nnever, as far as my experience goes, seen in great numbers, as we find\nrabbits in England, though the caution of the animal is such as to\nenable it to remain safe in districts from which other animals are\nsoon exterminated.\n\n\"As its name implies, it is found among rocks, in the crevices and\nholes of which it finds a retreat. When a natural cavity is not found,\nthe klip-das scratches a hole in the ground under the rocks, and\nburrows like a common rabbit. In size it is about equal to a hare,\nthough it is much shorter in the legs, and has ears more like those of\na rat than a rabbit. Its skin is covered with fur, thick and woolly,\nas though intended for a colder climate than that in which it is\nusually found; and, when seen from a distance, it looks nearly black.\n\n\"The rock-rabbit is a very watchful creature, and usually feeds on the\nsummit of any piece of rock near its home, always choosing one from\nwhich it can obtain a good view of the surrounding country. When it\nsees an enemy approaching, it sits rigidly on the rock and watches him\nwithout moving, so that at a little distance it is almost impossible\nto distinguish it from the rock on which it sits. When it does move,\nit darts quickly out of sight, and disappears into its burrow with a\nsudden leap.\n\n\"In consequence of its activity and cunning, the rock-rabbit is seldom\nkilled by white men; and when a hunter does secure one, it is\ngenerally by means of a long shot. The natives usually watch near its\nburrow, or noiselessly stalk it.\n\n\"I once killed one of these animals by a very long shot from a rifle,\nas it was sitting watching us from the top of a large boulder, at a\ndistance of a hundred and fifty yards or thereabouts. The Dutch Boers\nwho were with me were delighted at the sight of it, as they said it\nwas good eating; and so it proved to be, the flesh being somewhat like\nthat of a hare, though in our rough field-cookery we could not do\njustice to it.\"\n\nThis short narrative excellently illustrates the character of the\nanimal, which is classed among the \"four things which be exceeding\nwise.\" It is so crafty that no trap or snare ever set has induced a\nHyrax to enter it, and so wary that it is with difficulty to be killed\neven with the aid of fire-arms. \"No animal,\" writes Mr. Tristram,\n\"ever gave us so much trouble to secure.... The only chance of\nsecuring one is to be concealed, particularly about sunset or before\nsunrise, on some overhanging cliff, taking care not to let the shadow\nbe cast below, and then to wait until the little creatures cautiously\npeep forth from their holes. They are said to be common by those who\nhave not looked for them, but are certainly not abundant in Palestine,\nand few writers have ever had more than a single glimpse of one. I had\nthe good fortune to see one feeding in the gorge of the Kedron, and\nthen to watch it as it sat at the mouth of its hole, ruminating,\nmetaphorically if not literally, while waiting for sunset.\"\n\nShould the Hyrax manage to catch a glimpse of the enemy, it utters a\nshrill cry or squeal, and darts at once to its hole--an action which\nis followed by all its companions as soon as they hear the warning\ncry. It is a tolerably prolific animal, rearing four or five young at\na birth, and keeping them in a soft bed of hay and fur, in which they\nare almost hidden. If surprised in its hole and seized, the Hyrax will\nbite very sharply, its long chisel-edged teeth inflicting severe\nwounds on the hand that attempts to grasp it. But it is of a tolerably\ndocile disposition, and in a short time learns to know its owner, and\nto delight in receiving his caresses.\n\nThree species of Hyrax are known to naturalists. One is the Klip-das,\nor Rock-rabbit, of Southern Africa; the second is the Ashkoko of\nAbyssinia; and the third is the Syrian Hyrax, or the Coney of the\nBible. The two last species have often been confounded together, but\nthe Syrian animal may be known by the oblong pale spot on the middle\nof its back.\n\nThe Talmudical writers were greatly perplexed about the proper reading\nof the word Shaphan, some of them thinking it to be a jerboa, and\nothers considering it as the rabbit. Lewysohn sums up the arguments\nafter a rather curious fashion. According to him, the strongest\nargument against the translation of the Biblical word Shaphan as\n\"rabbit\" is that the animal came from Spain, and was probably unknown\nto the earlier Talmudists, though the later writers might have known\nit.\n\nThen, struck with the resemblance of the Hebrew word [Hebrew: Sh'p'n]\nand Spain, he proceeds to discuss the probability of the Shaphan\nderiving its name from Spain, the country of its origin, or of Spain\nbeing so called on account of the number of rabbits which inhabited\nit. He comes at last to the conclusion that the jerboa was probably\nthe animal which was prohibited in the Mosaic law; but that, as the\nrabbit answered in every respect to the Talmudical conditions, it may,\nfor all practical purposes, be accepted as the representative of the\nShaphan of Scripture.\n\n\n\n\nBEHEMOTH.\n\n Literal translation of the word Behemoth--Various theories\n respecting the identity of the animal--The Hippopotamus known to\n the ancient Hebrews--Geographical range of the animal--\"He\n eateth grass like the ox\"--Ravages of the Hippopotamus among the\n crops--Structure of the mouth and teeth--The \"sword or scythe\"\n of the Hippopotamus--Some strange theories--Haunts of the\n Hippopotamus--The Egyptian hunter--A valuable painting--Strength\n of the Hippopotamus--Rising of the Nile--Modern\n hunters--Wariness of the Hippopotamus--The pitfall and the\n drop-trap.\n\n\nIn the concluding part of that wonderful poem which is so familiar to\nus as the Book of Job, the Lord is represented as reproving the\nmurmurs of Job, by showing that he could not even understand the\nmysteries of the universe, much less the purposes of the Creator. By\npresuming to bring a charge of injustice against his Maker, he in fact\ninferred that the accuser was more competent to govern the world than\nwas the Creator, and thus laid himself open to the unanswerable irony\nof the splendid passages contained in chapters xl. xli., which show\nthat man cannot even rule the animals, his fellow-creatures, much less\ncontrol the destinies of the human race.\n\nThe passages with which we are at present concerned are to be found at\nthe end of the fortieth chapter, and contain a most powerful\ndescription of some animal which is called by the name of Behemoth.\nNow this word only occurs once in the whole of the Scriptures, _i.e._\nin Job xl. 15: \"Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee,\" &c. Some\ncommentators, in consequence of the plural termination of the word,\nwhich may be literally translated as \"beasts,\" have thought that it\nwas a collective term for all the largest beasts of the world, such as\nthe elephant, the hippopotamus, the wild cattle, and their like.\nOthers have thought that the elephant was signified by the word\nBehemoth; and some later writers, acquainted with pal\u00e6ontology, have\nput forward a conjecture that the Behemoth must have been some extinct\npachydermatous animal, like the dinotherium, in which might be\ncombined many of the qualities of the elephant and hippopotamus.\n\nIt is now, however, agreed by all Biblical scholars and naturalists,\nthat the hippopotamus, and no other animal, is the creature which was\nsignified by the word Behemoth, and this interpretation is followed in\nthe Jewish Bible.\n\nWe will now take the whole of the passage, and afterwards examine it\nby degrees, comparing the Authorized Version with the Jewish Bible,\nand noting at the same time one or two variations in the rendering of\ncertain phrases. The passage is given as follows in the Jewish Bible,\nand may be compared with our Authorized Version:--\n\n\"Behold now the river-horse, which I have made with thee: he eateth\ngrass like an ox.\n\n\"Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his vigour is in the\nmuscles of his body.\n\n\"He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his thighs are wrapped\ntogether.\n\n\"His bones are pipes of copper; his bones are like bars of iron.\n\n\"He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can alone reach\nhis sword.\n\n\"That the mountains should bring forth food for him, and all the\nbeasts of the field play there.\n\n\"He lieth under wild lotuses, in the covert of the reed, and fens.\n\n\"Wild lotuses cover him with their shadow; willows of the brook\ncompass him about.\n\n\"Behold, should a river overflow, he hasteth not: he feels secure\nshould Jordan burst forth up to his mouth.\n\n\"He taketh it in with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.\"\n\nWe will now take this description in detail, and see how far it\napplies to the now familiar habits of the hippopotamus. A little\nallowance must of course be made for poetical imagery, but we shall\nfind that in all important details the account of the Behemoth agrees\nperfectly with the appearance and habits of the hippopotamus.\n\nIn the first place, it is evident that we may dismiss from our minds\nthe idea that the Behemoth was an extinct pachyderm. The whole tenor\nof the passage shows that it must have been an animal then existing,\nand whose habits were familiar to Job and his friends. Now the date of\nthe Book of Job could not have been earlier than about 1500 B.C., and\nin, consequence, the ideas of a pal\u00e6ozoic animal must be discarded.\n\nWe may also dismiss the elephant, inasmuch as it was most unlikely\nthat Job should have known anything about the animal, and it is\ncertain that he could not have attained the familiarity with its\nappearance and habits which is inferred by the context. Moreover, it\ncannot be said of the elephant that \"he eateth grass as an ox.\" The\nelephant feeds chiefly on the leaves of trees, and when he does eat\ngrass, he cannot do so \"like an ox,\" but plucks it with his proboscis,\nand then puts the green tufts into his mouth. So characteristic a\ngesture as this would never have passed unnoticed in a description so\nfull of detail.\n\nThat the hippopotamus was known to the ancient Hebrews is certain.\nAfter their sojourn in Egypt they had necessarily become familiarized\nwith it; and if, as most commentators believe, the date of the Book of\nJob be subsequent to the liberation of the Israelites, there is no\ndifficulty in assuming that Job and his companions were well\nacquainted with the animal. Even if the book be of an earlier date, it\nis still possible that the hippopotamus may, in those days, have lived\nin rivers where it is now as much extinct as it is in England. Mr.\nTristram remarks on this point: \"No hippopotamus is found in Asia, but\nthere is no reason for asserting that it may not have had an eastern\nrange as far as Palestine, and wallowed in the Jordan; for its bones\nare found in the _d\u00e9bris_ of the rivers of Algeria, flowing into the\nMediterranean, when tradition is quite silent as to its former\nexistence.\n\n\"Several extinct species of hippopotamus have been found in the later\ntertiary deposits, both of England and other countries of Europe,\nembedded in gravel which contains shells of many existing species of\nthe locality, showing that the temperature has not much changed, and\nthat some of the fossil species were natives of cold and temperate\nclimes.\"\n\nThere is no doubt that the hippopotamus and the urus were the two\nlargest animals known to the Jews, and it is probably on that account\nthat the former received the name of Behemoth.\n\nAssuming, therefore, that the Behemoth is identical with the\nhippopotamus, we will proceed with the description.\n\nThe words \"whom I made with thee\" have been variously translated. Some\nHebraists render them as, \"whom I made near thee,\" _i.e._ near or in\nthe country in which Job lived. Others read the words, \"like as thee,\"\n_i.e._ that the Behemoth was the fellow-creature of Job. Others again\nunderstand them as signifying that the man and the animal were\ncontemporaneous, and the passage should be read, \"whom I made at the\nsame time with thee.\" Whichever interpretation we adopt, it is evident\nthat a parallel of some kind is drawn between the man and the beast.\n\n\"He eateth grass like the ox.\" The word which is here rendered \"grass\"\nis translated in Numb. xi. 5 as \"leeks.\" It means, something that is\ngreen, and is probably used to signify green herbage of any\ndescription. Now it is perfectly true of the hippopotamus that it eats\ngrass like an ox, or like cattle, as the passage may be translated. In\norder to supply its huge massive body with nourishment, it consumes\nvast quantities of food, as indeed may be inferred from the structure\nof its mouth and jaws. The mouth is enormously broad and\nshovel-shaped, so as to take in a large quantity of food at once; and\nthe gape is so wide, that when the animal opens its jaws to their full\nextent it seems to split its head into two nearly equal portions. This\ngreat mobility of jaw is assisted by the peculiar form of the gape,\nwhich takes a sudden turn upwards, and reaches almost to the eyes.\n\nJust as the mouth is formed to contain a vast quantity of food, so\nthe jaws and teeth are made to procure it. From the front of the lower\njaw the incisor teeth project horizontally, no longer performing the\nordinary duties of teeth, but being modified into tusks, which are in\nall probability used as levers for prising up the vegetables on which\nthe animal lives. But the most singular portion of the jaw is the mode\nin which the canine teeth are modified so as to resemble the incisor\nteeth of rodents, and to perform a similar office.\n\nThese teeth are very long, curved, and chisel-edged at their tips,\ntheir shape being preserved by continual attrition, just as has been\nmentioned of the hyrax. The material of the teeth is peculiarly hard,\nso much so, indeed, that it is in great request for artificial teeth,\nthe \"verniers\" of philosophical instruments, and similar purposes.\nConsequently, with these teeth the hippopotamus can cut through the\nstems of thick and strong herbage as with shears, and the strength of\nits jaws is so great that an angered hippopotamus has been known to\nbite a man completely in two, and to crush a canoe to fragments with a\nsingle movement of its enormous jaws.\n\nKeeping this description in our minds, we shall see how true is the\nstatement in verse 19. This passage is not adequately rendered in the\nAuthorized Version: the word which is translated as \"sword\" also\nsignifies a scythe, and evidently having that meaning in the text. The\npassage is best translated thus: \"His Maker hath furnished him with\nhis scythe.\"\n\nThe havoc which such an animal can make among growing crops may be\neasily imagined. It is fond of leaving the river, and forcing its way\ninto cultivated grounds, where it eats vast quantities of green food,\nand destroys as much as it eats, by the trampling of its heavy feet.\nOwing to the width of the animal, the feet are placed very far apart,\nand the consequence is that the hippopotamus makes a double path, the\nfeet of each side trampling down the herbage, and causing the track to\nlook like a double rut, with an elevated ridge between them.\n\nSome little difficulty has been made respecting the passage in verse\n20, \"Surely the mountains bring him forth food.\" Commentators ignorant\nof the habits of the hippopotamus, and not acquainted with the\ncharacter of the country where it lives, have thought that the animal\nonly lived in the rivers, and merely found its food along its banks,\nor at most upon the marshes at the river-side. The hippopotamus, say\nthey, is not a dweller on the mountains, but an inhabitant of the\nriver, and therefore this passage cannot rightly be applied to the\nanimal.\n\nNow, in the first place, the word _harim_, which is translated as\n\"mountains\" in the Authorized Version, is rendered as \"hills\" by many\nHebraists. Moreover, as we know from many passages of Scripture, the\nword \"mountain\" is applied to any elevated spot, without reference to\nits height. Such places are very common along the banks of the Nile,\nand are employed for the culture of vegetables, which would not grow\nproperly upon the flat and marshy lands around them. These spots are\nvery attractive to the hippopotamus, who likes a change of diet, and\nthus finds food upon the mountains. In many parts of Egypt the river\nruns through a mountainous country, so that the hills are within a\nvery short distance of the water, and are easily reached by the\nhippopotamus.\n\nThe Talmudical writers exaggerated, after their custom, the\ndimensions, voracity, and other attributes of the Behemoth. They said\nthat the animal devoured daily the herbage of a thousand hills, but\nthat, in order to prevent the devastation of the world which such\nvoracity would occasion, the herbage was miraculously renewed every\nnight. Only two of the Behemoth were ever created, and, lest they\nshould increase in numbers, and destroy every green thing on the face\nof the earth, they were made incapable of propagating their kind.\nThere are other legends of the Behemoth too puerile to be narrated.\n\nWe will now proceed to the next verse. After mentioning that the\nBehemoth can eat grass like an ox, and finds its food upon the hills,\nthe sacred writer proceeds to show that in its moments of repose it is\nan inhabitant of the rivers and marshy ground: \"He lieth under the\nshady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.\n\n\"The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook\ncompass him about.\"\n\nHere I may remind the reader that the compound Hebrew word which is\nrendered in the Authorized Version as \"shady trees\" is translated by\nsome persons as \"wild lotuses\"--a rendering which is followed by the\neditor of the Jewish Bible. Apparently, however, the Authorized\nVersion gives a more correct meaning of the term. Judging from a\nwell-known Egyptian painting, which represents a hunter in the act of\nharpooning the hippopotamus, the tall papyrus reeds are the plants\nthat are signified by this word, which occurs in no other place in the\nScriptures.\n\nNothing can be more accurate than this description of the habits of\nthe animal. I have now before me a number of sketches by Mr. T.\nBaines, representing various incidents in the life of the\nhippopotamus; and in one or two of them, the little islands that stud\nthe river, as well as the banks themselves, are thickly clothed with\nreeds mixed with papyrus, the whole being exactly similar to those\nwhich are represented in the conventional style of Egyptian art. These\nspots are the favourite haunts of the hippopotamus, which loves to lie\nunder their shadow, its whole body remaining concealed in the water,\nand only the eyes, ears, and nostrils appearing above the surface.\n\nAs reference will be made to this painting when we come to the\nLeviathan, it will be as well to describe it in detail. In order that\nthe reader should fully understand it, I have had it translated, so to\nspeak, from the conventional outline of Egyptian art into perspective,\nexactly as has been done with the Assyrian and Egyptian chariots.\n\nIn the foreground is seen the hunter, standing on a boat that closely\nresembles the raft-boat which is still in use in several parts of\nAfrica. It is made of the very light wood called ambatch, by cutting\ndown the requisite number of trees, laying them side by side so that\ntheir bases form the stern and their points the bow of the\nextemporized boat. They are then firmly lashed together, the pointed\nends turned upwards, and the simple vessel is complete. It is, in\nfact, nothing more than a raft of triangular shape, but the wood is so\nbuoyant that it answers every purpose.\n\nIn his hand the hunter grasps the harpoon which he is about to launch\nat the hippopotamus. This is evidently the same weapon which is still\nemployed for that purpose. It consists of a long shaft, into the end\nof which a barbed iron point is loosely inserted. To the iron point is\nattached one end of a rope, and to the other end, which is held in the\nleft hand of the harpooner, a float of ambatch wood is fastened.\n\n [Illustration: THE HIPPOPOTAMUS, OR BEHEMOTH OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee._\"--JOB xl. 15.]\n\nWhen the weapon is thrown, the furious struggles of the wounded animal\ndisengage the shaft of the harpoon, which is regained by the\nhunter; and as it dashes through the water, throwing up spray\nas it goes, the ambatch float keeps the end of the rope at the\nsurface, so that it can be seen as soon as the animal becomes quieter.\nSometimes it dives to the bottom, and remains there as long as its\nbreath can hold out; and when it comes up to breathe, it only pushes\nthe nostrils out of the water under the shadow of the reeds, so that\nbut for the float it might manage to escape.\n\n [Illustration: THE EGYPTIAN HUNTER.\n\n \"_He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and\n fens._\"--JOB xl. 21.\n\n (The attitude of the Hippopotamus is copied from the painting.)]\n\nIn the meantime, guided by the float, the hunter follows the course of\nthe animal, and, as soon as it comes within reach of his weapon,\ndrives another spear into it, and so proceeds until the animal dies\nfrom loss of blood. The modern hunters never throw a second harpoon\nunless the one already fixed gives way, mainly employing a spear to\ninflict the last wounds. But if we may judge from this painting, the\nEgyptian hunter attached a new rope with every cast of his weapon,\nand, when the hippopotamus became weak from its wounds, gathered up\nthe ropes and came to close quarters.\n\nIn the bow of the boat is the hunter's assistant, armed with a rope\nmade lasso-wise into a noose, which he is throwing over the head of\nthe hippopotamus, whose attitude and expression show evidently, in\nspite of the rudeness of the drawing, the impotent anger of the\nweakened animal.\n\nBehind the hippopotamus are the tall and dense reeds and papyrus under\nthe shelter of which the animal loves to lie, and on the surface of\nthe water float the beautiful white flowers of the lotus.\n\nIn the Egyptian painting, the artist, in spite of the\nconventionalities to which he was bound, has depicted the whole scene\nwith skill and spirit. The head and open mouth of the hippopotamus are\nremarkably fine, and show that the artist who drew the animal must\nhave seen it when half mad with pain, and half dead from loss of\nblood.\n\nThe enormous strength of the hippopotamus is shown in verses 16, 18,\nthe last of which passages requires a little explanation. Two\ndifferent words are used here to express the bones of the animal. The\nfirst is derived from a word signifying strength, and means the\n\"strong bones,\" _i.e._ those of the legs. These are hollow, and are\ntherefore aptly compared to tubes or pipes of copper. The second term\nis thought by some Hebraists to refer to the rib-bones, which are\nsolid, and therefore are not likened to tubes, but to bars of iron.\n\nThe 23d verse has been translated rather variously. The Authorized\nVersion can be seen by reference to a Bible, and another translation,\nthat of the Jewish Bible, is given on page 319. A third, and perhaps\nthe best rendering of this passage is given by the Rev. W. Drake, in\nSmith's \"Dictionary of the Bible:\" \"Lo, the river swelleth proudly\nagainst him, yet he is not alarmed; he is securely confident though a\nJordan burst forth against his mouth.\"\n\nIn all probability reference is here made to the annual rising of the\nNile, and the inundations which it causes. In some years, when it\nrises much above its usual height, the floods become most disastrous.\nWhole villages are swept away, and scarcely a vestige of the mud-built\nhouses is left; the dead bodies of human beings are seen intermixed\nwith those of cattle, and the whole country is one scene of\ndesolation. Yet the almost amphibious hippopotamus cares nothing for\nthe floods, as long as it can find food, and so, \"though the river\nswelleth proudly against him,\" he is not alarmed.\n\nFrom the use of the word \"Jordan\" in the same verse, it might be\nthought that the river of Palestine was intended. This, however, is\nnot the case. The word \"Jordan\" is simply used as a poetical term for\nany river, and is derived from a Hebrew word which signifies\n\"descending quickly.\"\n\nWe now come to the last verse of this noble description: \"He taketh it\nin with his eyes.\" These words have also been variously rendered, some\ntranslating them as \"He receiveth it (_i.e._ the river) up to his\neyes.\" But the translation which seems to suit the context best is,\n\"Who will take him when in his sight? His nose pierceth through\n(_i.e._ detects) snares.\" Now, this faculty of detecting snares is one\nof the chief characteristics of the hippopotamus, when it lives near\nplaces inhabited by mankind, who are always doing their best to\ndestroy it. In the first place, its body gives them an almost\nunlimited supply of flesh, the fat is very highly valued for many\npurposes, the teeth are sold to the ivory-dealers, and the hide is cut\nup into whips, or khoorbashes.\n\nThere is now before me a khoorbash, purchased from a native Egyptian\nwho was beating a servant with it. The whip is identical with that\nwhich was used by the ancient Egyptians in urging the Israelites to\ntheir tasks, and the scene reminded the traveller so forcibly of the\nold Scriptural times that he rescued the unfortunate servant, and\npurchased the khoorbash, which is now in my collection.\n\nNot content with hunting the hippopotamus, the natives contrive\nvarious traps, either pitfalls or drop-traps. The former are simply\npits dug in the path of the animal, covered with sticks and reeds, and\nhaving at the bottom a sharp stake on which the victim is impaled, and\nso effectually prevented from escaping or damaging the pit by its\nstruggles.\n\n [Illustration: HIPPOPOTAMUS AND TRAP.\n\n \"_His nose pierceth through snares._\"--JOB xl. 24.]\n\nThe drop-trap is a log of wood, weighted with stones, and having at\none end an iron spike, which is sometimes poisoned. The path which the\nanimal takes is watched, a conveniently overhanging branch is\nselected, and from that branch the cruel spear is suspended, by a\ncatch or trigger, exactly over the centre of the path. There is no\ndifficulty in finding the precise centre of the path, owing to the\npeculiar gait of the animal, which has already been described. One end\nof the trigger supports the spear, and to the other is attached a\nrope, which is brought across the path in such a way that when touched\nit relieves the spear, which is driven deeply into the animal's back.\nIf well hung, the spear-blade divides the spine, and the wounded\nanimal falls on the spot, but, even if it should miss a vital part,\nthe poison soon does its fatal work.\n\nIn consequence of the continual persecution to which it is subjected,\nthe hippopotamus becomes exceedingly wary, and, huge, clumsy, and\nblundering as it looks, is clever enough to detect either pitfall or\ndrop-trap that have not been contrived with especial care. An old and\nexperienced hippopotamus becomes so wary that he will be suspicious\neven of a bent twig, and, rather than venture across it, he will leave\nthe path, force for himself a roundabout passage, and return to the\npath beyond the object that alarmed him.\n\nMr. T. Baines, to whose sketches I am indebted for the illustration,\ntold me that the hippopotamus is possessed of much more intellect than\nmight be expected from a creature of so dull, clumsy, and unpromising\naspect. Apathetic it generally is, and, as long as it is left\nunmolested, does not care to molest even the human beings that intrude\nupon its repose.\n\nIt likes to lie in the shade of the reeds and rushes, and may be seen\nfloating in the water, with only the nostrils, the eyes, and the ears\nabove the surface, these organs being set in a line along the head,\nevidently for the purpose of allowing the whole body to be hidden\nunder water while the three most important senses are capable of\nacting.\n\nA canoe-man who knows the habits of the hippopotamus will fearlessly\ntake his fragile vessel through a herd of the animals, knowing that,\nif he only avoids contact with them, they will not interfere with him.\nThe only danger is, that a hippopotamus may rise under the canoe, and\nstrike itself against the boat, in which case the animal is rather apt\nto consider the intruding object as an enemy, and to attack it,\nsometimes crushing the canoe between its teeth, and mostly upsetting\nit, and throwing the crew into the water. In such a case, the men\nalways dive at once to the bottom of the river, and hold on to some\nweed or rock as long as they can exist without breathing. The reason\nfor this proceeding is, that the hippopotamus always looks for its\nenemy upon the surface of the water, and, if the men were to swim to\nshore, they would be caught and killed before they had swum many\nstrokes. But, as it sees nothing but the damaged canoe, its\nshort-lived anger vanishes, and it sinks again into the river,\nleaving the men at liberty to regain and repair their vessel.\n\nThere is one passage in the description of the Behemoth which requires\na few words of explanation: \"He moveth his tail like a cedar\" (v. 17).\n\nSeveral commentators have imagined that this expression shows that the\nBehemoth must have been an animal which had a very long and powerful\ntail, and have adduced the passage as a proof that the crocodile was\nthe animal that was signified by the Behemoth. Others, again, have\nshifted the position of the tail, and, by rendering it as the\n\"proboscis,\" have identified the Behemoth with the elephant. There is,\nhowever, no necessity for straining the interpretation, the passage\nevidently signifying that the member in question is stiff and\ninflexible as the cedar-stem.\n\n\n\n\nBIRDS.\n\n\n\n\nTHE L\u00c4MMERGEIER, OR OSSIFRAGE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n Difficulty of identifying the various birds mentioned in\n Scripture--The vultures of Palestine--The L\u00e4mmergeier, or\n Ossifrage of Scripture--The Hebrew word Peres, and its\n signification--The Ossifrage, or Bone-breaker--Appearance of the\n L\u00e4mmergeier--Its flight and mode of feeding--How the L\u00e4mmergeier\n kills snakes and tortoises, and breaks marrow-bones--Mode of\n destroying the chamois and mountain sheep--Nest of the\n L\u00e4mmergeier.\n\n\nIt has already been mentioned that even the best Biblical scholars\nhave found very great difficulties in identifying several of the\nanimals which are named in Scripture. This difficulty is greatly\nincreased when we come to the BIRDS, and in many instances it is\nabsolutely impossible to identify the Hebrew word with any precise\nspecies. In all probability, however, the nomenclature of the birds is\na very loose one, several species being classed under the same title.\n\nEven at the present day, the English language presents many similar\ninstances of poverty, as is well known to all zoologists. Taking the\nbirds as our first examples, how often do we not find the same word\nused to signify many distinct species, and, again, one species\ndesignated by several dissimilar words? The word Vulture, for example,\nis used to signify a great number of birds, including the L\u00e4mmergeier,\nthe Condors, the Griffons, the Caracaras, and others; while the term\nEagle has scarcely a less wide signification. Sometimes the name is\napplied in such a manner as to mislead those who are not scientific\nornithologists, and we find such inappropriate titles as night-hawk,\nfern-owl, hedge-sparrow, reed-wren, &c., the birds in question being\nneither hawks, owls, sparrows, nor wrens.\n\nKeeping this difficulty in mind, I shall mention all the species which\nare likely to have been classed under a single title, giving a general\ndescription of the whole, and a detailed account of the particular\nspecies which seems to answer most closely to the Hebrew word.\n\n\n [Illustration: THE L\u00c4MMERGEIER, OR OSSIFRAGE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_These are they of which ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the\n ossifrage, and the ospray._\"--DEUT. xiv. 12]\n\nFollowing the arrangement which has been employed in this work, I\nshall begin with the bird which has been placed by zoologists at the\nhead of its class, namely, the L\u00c4MMERGEIER, the bird which may be\nsafely identified with the Ossifrage of Scripture. The Hebrew word is\n\"Peres,\" a term which only occurs twice when signifying a species of\nbird; namely, in Lev. xi. 13, and the parallel passage in Deut. xiv.\n12. The first of these passages runs as follows: \"These ye shall have\nin abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an\nabomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray.\" The\ncorresponding passage in Deuteronomy has precisely the same\nsignification, though rather differently worded: \"These are they of\nwhich ye shall not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray.\"\n\nThe reader will here notice that the sacred narrative gives no account\nof the appearance or habits of the bird, but merely classed it with\nthe remainder of the predacious birds, all of which are declared to be\nunfit for food. We must therefore look for some assistance in the\netymology of the word _peres_, which signifies one who breaks\nanything. The same word occurs in several other passages of Scripture.\n\nFor example, the word was much used by David in commemorating any\nremarkable event. When David sent Uzzah and Ahio to fetch the ark from\nKirjath-jearim, the oxen which drew the cart stumbled and shook the\nark, so that it seemed likely to fall. Uzzah, who walked by the side\nof the cart, while his brother marched in front of the oxen,\ninstinctively put out his hand to uphold it, and fell dead by the side\nof the ark which he had touched without authority. In order to\ncommemorate this event, David called the spot whereon it occurred\nPerez-Uzzah, or the Breaking of Uzzah, \"because the LORD had made a\nbreach upon Uzzah.\" (See 2 Sam. vi. 8.)\n\nReference to this event was afterwards made by David when he brought\nthe ark into Jerusalem. Having taken warning by the solemn event which\nhe had witnessed, he called together the priests and Levites, to whom\nhe gave the commission to bring the ark with due honour, and \"said\nunto them, Ye are the chief of the fathers of the Levites: sanctify\nyourselves, both ye and your brethren, that ye may bring up the ark of\nthe Lord God of Israel unto the place that I have prepared for it.\n\n\"For, because ye did it not at the first, the LORD our God made a\nbreach (_peres_) upon us, for that we sought Him not in due order\" (1\nChron. xv. 12, 13). David again employed the word to signify the\nbreaking up or destruction of the Philistines. \"David smote them\nthere, and said, The Lord hath broken forth upon mine enemies before\nme, as the breach of waters. Therefore he called the name of that\nplace Baal-perazim\"--_i.e._ the Place of Breakings. The same word\noccurs again in that dread message to Belshazzar, written by the hand\nupon the wall, \"Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin,\" or _peres_, the last\nword signifying that the kingdom was broken up, and would be given\nto other rulers.\n\nThe word _peres_, then, signifies a breaker; and the Latin term\nOssifraga, or Bone-breaker, is a very good translation of the word.\nHow it applies to the L\u00e4mmergeier we shall presently see.\n\nThe L\u00e4mmergeier belongs to the vultures, but has much more the\nappearance of an eagle than a vulture, the neck being clothed with\nfeathers, instead of being naked or only covered with down. It may at\nonce be known by the tuft of long, hair-like feathers which depends\nfrom the beak, and which has gained for the bird the title of Bearded\nVulture. The colour of the plumage is a mixture of different browns\nand greys, tawny below and beautifully pencilled above, a line of pure\nwhite running along the middle of each feather. When young it is\nnearly black, and indeed has been treated as a separate species under\nthe name of Black Vulture.\n\nIt is one of the largest of the flying birds, its length often\nexceeding four feet, and the expanse of its wings being rather more\nthan ten feet. In consequence of this great spread of wing, it looks\nwhen flying like a much larger bird than it really is, and its size\nhas often been variously misstated. Its flight, as may be imagined\nfrom the possession of such wings, is equally grand and graceful, and\nit sweeps through the air with great force, apparently unaccompanied\nby effort.\n\nThe L\u00e4mmergeier extends through a very large range of country, and is\nfound throughout many parts of Europe and Asia. It is spread over the\nHoly Land, never congregating in numbers, like ordinary vultures, but\nliving in pairs, and scarcely any ravine being uninhabited by at least\none pair of L\u00e4mmergeiers.\n\nThe food of the L\u00e4mmergeier is, like that of other vultures, the flesh\nof dead animals, though it does not feed quite in the same manner that\nthey do. When the ordinary vultures have found a carcase they tear it\nto pieces, and soon remove all the flesh. This having been done, the\nL\u00e4mmergeier comes to the half-picked bones, eats the remaining flesh\nfrom them, and finishes by breaking them and eating the marrow. That a\nbird should be able to break a bone as thick and hard as the\nthigh-bone of a horse or ox seems rather problematical, but the bird\nachieves the feat in a simple and effectual manner.\n\nSeizing the bone in its claws, it rises to an immense height in the\nair, and then, balancing itself over some piece of rock, it lets the\nbone fall, and sweeps after it with scarce less rapidity than the bone\nfalls. Should the bone be broken by the fall, the bird picks the\nmarrow out of the fragments; and should it have escaped fracture by\nreason of falling on a soft piece of ground instead of a hard rock,\nthe bird picks it up, and renews the process until it has attained its\nobject. It will be seen, therefore, that the name of Ossifrage, or\nBone-breaker, may very properly be given to this bird.\n\nNot only does it extract the marrow from bones in this peculiar\nmanner, but it procures other articles of food by employing precisely\nthe same system. If it sees a tortoise, many of which reptiles are\nfound in the countries which it inhabits, it does not waste time and\ntrouble by trying to peck the shell open, but carries its prey high in\nthe air, drops it on the ground, and so breaks its shell to pieces.\nTortoises are often very hard-shelled creatures, and the L\u00e4mmergeier\nhas been observed to raise one of them and drop it six or seven times\nbefore the stubborn armour would yield. Snakes, too, are killed in a\nsimilar manner, being seized by the neck, and then dropped from a\nheight upon rocks or hard ground. The reader may perhaps be aware that\nthe Hooded Crow of England breaks bones and the shells of bivalve\nmolluscs in a similar manner.\n\nMr. Tristram suggests, with much probability, that the \"eagle\" which\nmistook the bald head of the poet \u00c6schylus for a white stone, and\nkilled him by dropping a tortoise upon it, was in all likelihood a\nL\u00e4mmergeier, the bird being a denizen of the same country, and the act\nof tortoise-dropping being its usual mode of killing those reptiles.\n\nWe now see why the L\u00e4mmergeier is furnished with such enormous wings,\nand so great a power of flight, these attributes being needful in\norder to enable it to lift its prey to a sufficient height. The air,\nas we all know, becomes more and more attenuated in exact proportion\nto the height above the earth; and did not the bird possess such great\npowers of flight, it would not be able to carry a heavy tortoise into\nthe thinner strata of air which are found at the height to which it\nsoars.\n\nThe instinct of killing its prey by a fall is employed against other\nanimals besides snakes and tortoises, though exerted in a somewhat\ndifferent manner. The bird, as has already been mentioned, lives among\nmountain ranges, and it may be seen floating about them for hours\ntogether, watching each inch of ground in search of prey. Should it\nsee a goat or other inhabitant of the rocks standing near a precipice,\nthe L\u00e4mmergeier sweeps rapidly upon it, and with a blow of its wing\nknocks the animal off the rock into the valley beneath, where it lies\nhelplessly maimed, even if not killed by the fall.\n\nEven hares and lambs are killed in this manner, and it is from the\nhavoc which the L\u00e4mmergeier makes among the sheep that it has obtained\nthe name of L\u00e4mmergeier, or Lamb-Vulture. So swift and noiseless is\nthe rush of the bird, that an animal which has once been marked by its\nblood-red eye seldom escapes from the swoop; and even the Alpine\nhunters, who spend their lives in pursuit of the chamois, have\noccasionally been put in great jeopardy by the sudden attack of a\nL\u00e4mmergeier, the bird having mistaken their crouching forms for the\nchamois, and only turned aside at the last moment.\n\nThe reason for employing so remarkable a mode of attack is to be found\nin the structure of the feet, which, although belonging to so large\nand powerful a bird, are comparatively feeble, and are unable, like\nthose of the eagle, to grasp the living animal in a deadly hold, and\nto drive the sharp talons into its vitals. They are not well adapted\nfor holding prey, the talons not possessing the hook-like form or the\nsharp points which characterise those of the eagle. The feet, by the\nway, are feathered down to the toes. The beak, too, is weak when\ncompared with the rest of the body, and could not perform its work\nwere not the object which it tears previously shattered by the fall\nfrom a height.\n\nThe nest of the L\u00e4mmergeier is made of sticks and sods, and is of\nenormous dimensions. It is almost always placed upon a lofty cliff,\nand contains about a wagon-load or so of sticks rudely interwoven, and\nsupporting a nearly equal amount of sods and moss.\n\nAn allied species lives in Northern Africa, where it is called by a\nname which signifies Father Longbeard, in allusion to the beard-like\ntufts of the bill.\n\n\n\n\nTHE EGYPTIAN VULTURE OR GIER-EAGLE.\n\n The R\u00e2ch\u00e2m or Gier-Eagle identified with the Egyptian Vulture--Its\n appearance on the Egyptian monuments--Signification of the word\n _R\u00e2ch\u00e2m_--Various translations of the word--The shape, size, and\n colour of the bird--Its value as a scavenger, and its general\n habits--The Egyptian Vultures and the griffons--Its fondness for the\n society of man--Nest of the Egyptian Vulture.\n\n\nIn the same list of unclean birds which has already been given, we\nfind the name of a bird which we can identify without much difficulty,\nalthough there has been some little controversy about it. This is the\nso-called Gier-Eagle, which is named with the cormorant and the\npelican as one of the birds which the Jews are forbidden to eat. The\nword which is translated as Gier-Eagle is R\u00e2ch\u00e2m, a name which is\nalmost identical with the Arabic name of the EGYPTIAN VULTURE,\nsometimes called Pharaoh's Chicken, because it is so often sculptured\non the ancient monuments of Egypt. It is called by the Turks by a name\nwhich signifies White Father, in allusion to the colour of its\nplumage.\n\nBefore proceeding to a description of the bird, we will examine the\nother interpretations which have been given to the word _r\u00e2ch\u00e2m_.\n\nIn the first place, the word signifies \"love,\" and is used in that\nsense in many passages of Scripture. According to Buxtorf, the bird in\nquestion is the merops or bee-eater, \"a bird so called from the love\nand pity which is shown to its parents, because it nurtures them when\nhidden in the most lofty caves.\" Some of the Talmudists take it to be\nthe woodpecker.\n\nAnother rendering of the word which has received much favour is, that\nthe R\u00e2ch\u00e2m is the hyacinthine gallinule, or sultana hen (_Pophyrio\nveterum_). This bird is allied to the rails, and is remarkable for the\ngreat length of its toes, by means of which it can walk on floating\nherbage as it lies on the surface of the water. The colour of the bird\nis a rich and variable blue, darker on the back and lighter on the\nthroat and breast. It is on account of this purple hue that the bird\nhas received the name of _Porphyrio_, or Purple Bird. It is spread\nover many parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe.\n\n [Illustration: EGYPTIAN VULTURE, OR GIER-EAGLE.\n\n \"_And the pelican, and the gier-eagle, and the cormorant._\"--DEUT.\n xiv. 17.]\n\nThe reading of _r\u00e2ch\u00e2m_ as _porphyrio_ is followed in the Septuagint,\nand the reading has been defended on the ground that the bird must\nbelong to the aquatic group, being placed between the pelican and\ncormorant. The Jewish Bible follows our version, but affixes the mark\nof doubt to the word.\n\nAlthough some of the Talmudists render the word as woodpecker, others\nidentify it with the Egyptian Vulture. In Lewysohn's \"Zoologie des\nTalmuds,\" there is a curious speculation on this subject. This bird,\naccording to the authors whom he quotes, is the Schirkrek, and\nderives its name from its peculiar cry, which begins with a hiss\n(Schirk) and ends with a shriek (Rek). The bird utters its cry when\nthe rising of the Nile is expected, and so has earned the name of\nR\u00e2ch\u00e2m, or Love, this word being frequently used in the Scriptures as\na metaphor for rain, dew, or any water that nourishes plants.\n\nWithout adopting the process of reasoning employed in this case, we\nmay safely accept the conclusion, and consider the R\u00e2ch\u00e2m as identical\nwith the Egyptian Vulture (_Neophron perenopterus_).\n\nThis bird is not a very large one, being about equal to a raven in\nsize, though its enormously long wings give it an appearance of much\ngreater size. Its colour is white, with the exception of the quill\nfeathers of the wings, which are dark-brown. The bill and the naked\nface and legs are bright ochreous yellow. It does not attain this\nwhite plumage until its third year, its colour before reaching adult\nage being brown, with a grey neck and dull yellow legs and face.\n\nThe Egyptian Vulture, although not large, is a really handsome bird,\nthe bold contrast of pure white and dark brown being very conspicuous\nwhen it is on the wing. In this plumage it has never been seen in\nEngland, but one or two examples are known of the Egyptian Vulture\nbeing killed in England while still in its dark-brown clothing.\n\nIt inhabits a very wide range of country, being found throughout all\nthe warmer parts of the Old World. Although it is tolerably plentiful,\nit is never seen in great numbers, as is the case with several of the\nvultures, but is always to be found in pairs, the male and female\nnever separating, and invariably being seen close together. In fact,\nin places where it is common it is hardly possible to travel more than\na mile or two without seeing a pair of Egyptian Vultures. Should more\nthan two of these birds be seen together, the spectator may be sure\nthat they have congregated over some food. It has been well suggested\nthat its Hebrew name of R\u00e2ch\u00e2m, or Love, has been given to it in\nconsequence of this constant association of the male and female.\n\nThe Egyptian Vulture is one of the best of scavengers, not only\ndevouring the carcases of dead animals, but feeding on every kind of\noffal or garbage. Indeed, its teeth and claws are much too feeble to\nenable it to cope with the true vultures in tearing up a large\ncarcase, and in consequence it never really associates with them,\nalthough it may be seen hovering near them, and it never ventures to\nfeed in their company, keeping at a respectful distance while they\nfeed, and, when they retire, humbly making a meal on the scraps which\nthey have left.\n\nMr. Tristram narrates an amusing instance of this trait of character.\n\"On a subsequent occasion, on the north side of Hermon, we observed\nthe griffons teaching a lesson of patience to the inferior scavengers.\nA long row of Egyptian vultures were sitting on some rocks, so\nintently watching a spot in a corn-field that they took no notice of\nour approach. Creeping cautiously near, we watched a score of griffons\nbusily engaged in turning over a dead horse, one side of which they\nhad already reduced to a skeleton.\n\n\"Their united efforts had just effected this, when we showed\nourselves, and they quickly retired. The inferior birds, who dreaded\nus much less than them, at once darted to the repast, and, utterly\nregardless of our presence within ten yards of them, began to gorge.\nWe had hardly retired two hundred yards, when the griffons came down\nwith a swoop, and the Egyptian vultures and a pair or two of eagles\nhurriedly resumed their post of observation; while some black kites\nremained, and contrived by their superior agility to filch a few\nmorsels from their lordly superiors.\"\n\nSo useful is this bird as a scavenger, that it is protected in all\nparts of the East by the most stringent laws, so that a naturalist who\nwishes for specimens has some difficulty in procuring the bird, or\neven its egg. It wanders about the streets of the villages, and may\ngenerally be found investigating the heaps of refuse which are left to\nbe cleared away by the animals and birds which constitute the\nscavengers of the East.\n\nIt not only eats dead animal substances, but kills and devours great\nquantities of rats, mice, lizards, and other pests that swarm in hot\ncountries. So tame is it, that it may even be observed, like the gull\nand the rook of our own country, following the ploughman as he turns\nup the ground, and examining the furrow for the purpose of picking up\nthe worms, grubs, and similar creatures that are disturbed by the\nshare.\n\nBeing thus protected and encouraged by man, there is good reason why\nit should have learned in course of time to fear him far less than its\nown kind. Indeed, it is so utterly fearless with regard to human\nbeings, that it habitually follows the caravans as they pass from one\ntown to another, for the sake of feeding on the refuse food and other\noffal which is thrown aside on the road.\n\nTwo articles of diet which certainly do not seem to fall within the\nordinary range of vulture's food are said to be consumed by this bird.\nThe first is the egg of the ostrich, the shell of which is too hard to\nbe broken by the feeble beak of the Egyptian Vulture. The bird cannot,\nlike the l\u00e4mmergeier, carry the egg into the air and drop it on the\nground, because its feet are not large enough to grasp it, and only\nslip off its round and polished surface. Therefore, instead of raising\nthe egg into the air and dropping it upon a stone, it carries a stone\ninto the air and drops it upon the egg. So at least say the natives of\nthe country which it inhabits, and there is no reason why we should\ndoubt the truth of the statement.\n\nThe other article of food is a sort of melon, very full of juice. This\nmelon is called \"nara,\" and is devoured by various creatures, such as\nlions, leopards, mice, ostriches, &c. and seems to serve them instead\nof drink.\n\nThe nest of the Egyptian Vulture is made in some rocky ledge, and the\nbird does not trouble itself about selecting a spot inaccessible to\nman, knowing well that it will not be disturbed. The nest is, like\nthat of other vultures, a large and rude mass of sticks, sods, bones,\nand similar materials, to which are added any bits of rag, rope, skin,\nand other village refuse which it can pick up as it traverses the\nstreets. There are two, and occasionally three, eggs, rather variously\nmottled with red. In its breeding, as in its general life, it is not a\ngregarious bird, never breeding in colonies, and, indeed, very seldom\nchoosing a spot for its nest near one which has already been selected\nby another pair.\n\nThe illustration on page 340 represents part of the nest of the\nEgyptian Vulture, in which the curious mixture of bones and sticks is\nwell shown. The parent birds are drawn in two characteristic attitudes\ntaken from life, and well exhibit the feeble beak, the peculiar and\nintelligent, almost cunning expression of the head, and the ruff of\nfeathers which surrounds the upper part of the neck. In the distance\nanother bird is drawn as it appears on the wing, in order to show the\ncontrast between the white plumage and the dark quill feathers of the\nwings, the bird presenting a general appearance very similar to that\nof the common English sea-gull.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nGRIFFON VULTURE, OR EAGLE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The Griffon Vulture identified with the Eagle of Scripture--The word\n _Nesher_ and its signification--Geographical range of the Griffon--Its\n mode of flight and sociable habits--The featherless head and neck of\n the bird--The Vulture used as an image of strength, swiftness, and\n rapacity--Its powers of sight--How Vultures assemble round a\n carcase--Nesting-places of the Griffon--Mr. Tristram's description of\n the Griffon--Rock-caves of the Wady Ham\u00e2m--Care of the young, and\n teaching them to fly--Strength of the Griffon--Its emblematical use in\n Egypt and Assyria--The god Nisroch--Noble aspect of the Griffon--Its\n longevity--Various attitudes assumed by the bird.\n\n\nWe now come to another word which will give us but little trouble in\nidentification. This is the word _Nesher_, which is invariably\ntranslated in the Authorized Version of the Bible as Eagle, but which\nwas undoubtedly a different bird, and has satisfactorily been\nidentified with the GRIFFON VULTURE, or Great Vulture (_Gyps fulvus_).\nThe reasons for this conclusion are so inextricably interwoven with\nthe various passages in which the bird is mentioned, that I shall not\ngive them separately, but simply allude to them in the course of the\narticle.\n\nIn the first place, the name Nesher is derived, according to many\nHebraists, from a word which signifies the power of sight, and is\ngiven to the bird in consequence of its piercing vision. The\nTalmudical writers mention a curious proverb concerning the sight of\nthe Vulture, namely, that a Vulture in Babylon can see a carcase in\nPalestine. Other scholars derive it from a word which signifies its\nlongevity, while others again believe that the true derivation is to\nbe found in a word which signifies ripping up or tearing with the\nbeak.\n\n\nThe Griffon Vulture is found throughout a large portion of the Old\nWorld, inhabiting nearly all the warmer portions of this hemisphere.\nThe colour of the adult bird is a sort of yellowish brown, diversified\nby the black quill feathers and the ruff of white down that surrounds\nthe neck. The head and neck are without feathers, but are sparingly\ncovered with very short down of a similar character to that of the\nruff.\n\nIt is really a large bird, being little short of five feet in total\nlength, and the expanse of wing measuring about eight feet.\n\nThe Griffon Vulture is very plentiful in Palestine, and, unlike the\nlesser though equally useful Egyptian Vulture, congregates together in\ngreat numbers, feeding, flying, and herding in company. Large flocks\nof them may be seen daily, soaring high in the air, and sweeping their\ngraceful way in the grand curves which distinguish the flight of the\nlarge birds of prey. They are best to be seen in the early morning,\nbeing in the habit of quitting their rocky homes at daybreak, and\nindulging in a flight for two or three hours, after which they mostly\nreturn to the rocks, and wait until evening, when they take another\nshort flight before retiring to rest.\n\nAllusion is made in the Scriptures to the gregarious habits of the\nVultures: \"Wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be\ngathered together\" (Matt xxiv. 28). That the Vulture, and not the\neagle, is here signified, is evident from the fact that the eagles do\nnot congregate like the Vultures, never being seen in greater numbers\nthan two or three together, while the Vultures assemble in hundreds.\n\nThe featherless head of the Vulture is mentioned in the Book of Micah,\nchap. i. ver. 16: \"Make thee bald, and poll thee for thy delicate\nchildren; enlarge thy baldness as the eagle; for they are gone into\ncaptivity from thee.\" It is evident that in this passage reference is\nmade, not to the eagle, whose head is thickly covered with feathers,\nbut to the Vulture, whose head and neck are but scantily sprinkled\nwith white down. Some commentators, not aware that the word _nesher_\nshould have been rendered as \"vulture,\" have explained the passage by\nsaying that the prophet referred to the moulting-time of the eagle;\nbut the reader will see that such an explanation is at the best a\nforced one, whereas the reference to the bald head of the Vulture is\nboth simple and natural.\n\nThe voracity of the Vulture, and its capacity for discovering food,\nare both mentioned in Job xxxix. 27-30: \"Doth the eagle (_nesher_)\nmount up at thy command, and make her nest on high?\n\n\"She dwelleth and abideth on the rock, upon the crag of the rock, and\nthe strong place.\n\n\"From thence she seeketh the prey, and her eyes behold afar off.\n\n\"Her young ones also suck up blood: and where the slain are, there is\nshe.\"\n\nSee also Hab. i. 6-8, in which the prophet speaks of the Chaldeans,\n\"that bitter and hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth\nof the land, to possess the dwelling-places that are not theirs.\n\n\"They are terrible and dreadful: ... and their horsemen shall spread\nthemselves, and their horsemen shall come from far; they shall fly as\nthe eagle that hasteth to eat.\"\n\nThere is also a curious passage in the Book of Proverbs, chap. xxx.\nver. 17, which alludes to the carnivorous nature of the bird: \"The eye\nthat mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the\nravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat\nit.\"\n\nAllusion is made in several passages to the swiftness of the Vulture,\nas well as its voracity. See, for example, a portion of David's\nlamentation over the bodies of Saul and Jonathan, who, according to\nthe poet's metaphor, \"were lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in\ntheir death they were not divided; they were swifter than eagles, they\nwere stronger than lions.\"\n\nThe \"bitter\" people--namely, the Chaldeans--are again mentioned in a\nvery similar manner by the prophet Jeremiah: \"Our persecutors are\nswifter than the eagles of the heavens; they pursued us upon the\nmountains, they laid wait for us in the wilderness\" (Lam. iv. 19).\n\nThere is something peculiarly appropriate in employing the Vulture as\nan image of strength and swiftness when applied to warriors, the bird\nbeing an invariable attendant on the battle, and flying to the field\nof death with marvellous swiftness. All who had ever witnessed a\nbattle were familiar with the presence of the Vulture--the scene of\ncarnage, and the image which is employed, would be one which commended\nitself at once to those for whom it was intended. And, as the earlier\nhistory of the Jewish nation is essentially of a warlike character, we\ncannot wonder that so powerful and familiar an image should have been\nrepeatedly introduced into the sacred writings.\n\nThe wonderful powers of sight possessed by this bird are mentioned in\nthe passage from Job xxxix. which has already been quoted.\n\nHere it may be as well to say that, piercing as is the vision of the\nVulture, its visual powers have been much exaggerated. It certainly\ndoes possess a vision of no ordinary capacity, which is able to assume\neither a telescopic or a microscopic character, by means of a complex\nand marvellous structure, which can alter the whole shape of the organ\nat the will of the bird.\n\nNot only can the eye be thus altered, but it changes instantaneously,\nso as to accommodate itself to the task which it is to perform. A\nVulture, for example, sees from a vast height the body of a dead\nanimal, and instantly swoops down upon it like an arrow from a bow. In\norder to enable the bird to see so distant an object, the eye has been\nexercising its telescopic powers, and yet, in a second or two, when\nthe Vulture is close to its prey, the whole form of the eye must be\nchanged, or the bird would mistake its distance, and dash itself to\npieces on the ground.\n\nTo describe this beautiful piece of mechanism would be outside the\nscope of the present work; but the reader can find it in every good\nwork on comparative anatomy, and is strongly advised to make himself\nmaster of the means by which a result so apparently impossible is\nsecured.\n\nBy means of its powerful eyes, the Vulture can see to an enormous\ndistance, and with great clearness, but neither so far nor so clearly\nas is popularly supposed. It is true that, as soon as a carcase is\ndiscovered, it will be covered with Vultures, who arrive from every\nside, looking at first like tiny specks in the air, scarcely\nperceptible even to practised eyes, and all directing their flight to\nthe same point. \"Where the carcase is, there will the vultures be\ngathered together.\" But, although they all fly towards the same spot,\nit does not follow that they have all seen the same object. The fact\nis, they see and understand each other's movements.\n\nA single Vulture, for example, sees a dead or dying sheep, and swoops\ndown upon it. The other Vultures which are flying about in search of\nfood, and from which the animal in question may be concealed, know\nperfectly well that a Vulture soars high in the air when searching for\nfood, and only darts to the earth when it has found a suitable prey.\nThey immediately follow its example, and in their turn are followed by\nother Vultures, which can see their fellows from a distance, and know\nperfectly well why they are all converging to one spot.\n\nIn this way all the Vultures of a neighbourhood will understand, by a\nvery intelligible telegraph, that a dead body of some animal has been\nfound, and, aided by their wonderful powers of flight, will assemble\nover its body in an almost incredibly short space of time.\n\nThe resting-place of the Griffon Vulture is always on some lofty spot.\nThe Arabian Vulture will build within easy reach, the eagle prefers\nlofty situations, but nothing but the highest and most inaccessible\nspots will satisfy the Vulture. To reach the nest of this bird is\ntherefore a very difficult task, only to be attempted by experienced\nand intrepid cragsmen; and, in consequence, both the eggs and young of\nthe Griffon Vulture cannot be obtained except for a very high price.\nThe birds are fond of building in the rock-caves which are found in so\nmany parts of Palestine, and in some places they fill these places as\nthickly as rooks fill a rookery.\n\nThe fondness of the Vulture for such localities is more than once\nmentioned in Holy Writ. One of these passages, which occurs in Job\nxxxix. 29, has already been quoted, and another, and equally forcible\none, is to be found in the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah: \"Thy\nterribleness hath deceived thee, and the pride of thine heart, O thou\nthat dwellest in the clefts of the rock, that holdest the height of\nthe hill: though thou shouldest make thy nest as high as the eagle\n(_nesher_), I will bring thee down from thence, saith the Lord\" (Jer.\nxlix. 16).\n\nIn Mr. Tristram's \"Land of Israel,\" there is a very graphic\ndescription of the Griffon's nests, and of the difficulty experienced\nin reaching them. \"A narrow gorge, with limestone cliffs from five\nhundred to six hundred feet high, into which the sun never penetrates,\nwalls the rapid brook on each side so closely that we often had to\nride in the bed of the stream. The cliffs are perforated with caves at\nall heights, wholly inaccessible to man, the secure resting-place of\nhundreds of noble griffons, some l\u00e4mmergeiers, lanner falcons, and\nseveral species of eagle.... One day in the ravine well repaid us,\nthough so terrific were the precipices, that it was quite impossible\nto reach any of the nests with which it swarmed.\n\n\"We were more successful in the Wady Ham\u00e2m, the southwest end of the\nplain, the entrance from Hattin and the Buttauf, where we spent three\ndays in exploration. The cliffs, though reaching the height of fifteen\nhundred feet, rise like terraces, with enormous masses of _d\u00e9bris_,\nand the wood is half a mile wide. By the aid of Giacomo, who proved\nhimself an expert rope-climber, we reaped a good harvest of griffons'\neggs, some of the party being let down by ropes, while those above\nwere guided in working them by signals from others below in the\nvalley. It required the aid of a party of a dozen to capture these\nnests. The idea of scaling the cliff with ropes was quite new to some\nArabs who were herding cattle above, and who could not, excepting one\nlittle girl, be induced to render any assistance. She proved herself\nmost sensible and efficient in telegraphing.\n\n\"While capturing the griffons' nests, we were re-enacting a celebrated\nsiege in Jewish history. Close to us, at the head of the cliffs which\nform the limits of the celebrated Plain of Hattin, were the ruins of\nIrbid, the ancient Arbela, marked principally by the remains of a\nsynagogue, of which some marble shafts and fragments of entablature,\nlike those of Tell H\u00fbm, are still to be seen, and were afterwards\nvisited by us.\n\n\"Hosea mentions the place apparently as a strong fortress: 'All thy\nfortresses shall be spoiled, as Shalman spoiled Beth-arbel in the day\nof battle' (Hos. x. 14). Perhaps the prophet here refers to the\nrefuges in the rocks below.\n\n\"The long series of chambers and galleries in the face of the\nprecipice are called by the Arabs Kulat Ibn Ma\u00e2n, and are very fully\ndescribed by Josephus. These cliffs were the homes of a set of\nbandits, who resided here with their families, and for years set the\npower of Herod the Great at defiance. At length, when all other\nattempts at scaling the fortress had failed, he let down soldiers at\nthis very spot in boxes, by chains, who attacked the robbers with long\nhooks, and succeeded in rooting them all out. The exploit was familiar\nto us by an engraving of the _Penny Magazine_ of old, and little did\nwe dream that we should one day storm those very caves in a similar\nway ourselves. We could not but regret that Herod had neglected to\nleave his chains and grappling-irons for our use.\n\n\"The rock galleries, though now only tenanted by griffons, are very\ncomplete and perfect, and beautifully built. Long galleries wind\nbackwards and forwards in the cliff side, their walls being built with\ndressed stone, flush with the precipice, and often opening into\nspacious chambers. Tier after tier rise one after another with\nprojecting windows, connected by narrow staircases, carried sometimes\nupon arches, and in the upper portions rarely broken away. In many of\nthe upper chambers to which we were let down, the dust of ages had\naccumulated, undisturbed by any foot save that of the birds of the\nair; and here we rested during the heat of the day, with the plains\nand lake set as in a frame before us. We obtained a full zoological\nharvest, as in three days we captured fourteen nests of griffons.\"\n\nAlthough these caverns and rocky passages are much more accessible\nthan most of the places whereon the Griffons build, the natives never\nventure to enter them, being deterred not so much by their height, as\nby their superstitious fears. The Griffons instinctively found out\nthat man never entered these caverns, and so took possession of them.\n\nAs the young Griffons are brought up in these lofty and precipitous\nplaces, it is evident that their first flight must be a dangerous\nexperiment, requiring the aid of the parent birds. At first the young\nare rather nervous at the task which lies before them, and shrink from\ntrusting themselves to the air. The parents, however, encourage them\nto use their wings, take short flights in order to set them an\nexample, and, when they at last venture from the nest, accompany and\nencourage them in their first journey.\n\nEven this habit has been noted by the sacred writers, and been\nforcibly employed as an image of divine protection. See the Song of\nMoses, in which the aged leader, whose forty years' work was at last\nfinished, recapitulates the mercies vouchsafed to the people of\nIsrael, and exhorts them against the sin of ingratitude: \"For the\nLord's portion is His people; Jacob is the lot of His inheritance.\n\n\"He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness;\nHe led him about, He instructed him, He kept him as the apple of His\neye.\n\n\"As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young,\nspreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings;\n\n\"So the Lord alone did lead him, and there was no strange god with\nhim\" (Deut. xxxii. 9-12).\n\nThe strength of flight of the Vulture is also noticed by the sacred\nwriters. See, for example, Exod. xix. 4: \"Ye have seen what I did to\nthe Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' (_nesherim_) wings, and\nbrought you unto myself.\"\n\nThis passage had a peculiar force when addressed to the Hebrews, the\nVulture being one of the chief emblems of Egyptian power, and its\noutspread wings continually recurring on the grand monuments and\ntemples with which they must have been so familiar.\n\nStrangely enough, in their second captivity, the Jews met with the\nsame emblem among the Assyrians. For example, their god Nisroch, whom\nwe find mentioned as specially worshipped by Sennacherib, was a\nvulture-headed deity, bearing not only the head of the bird, but also\nits wings. The vast wings of the Vulture were by the Assyrians used as\ntypes of Divine power, and were therefore added, not only to human\nfigures, but to those of beasts. The human-headed and vulture-winged\nbulls of Nineveh, with which we are now so familiar, are good examples\nof this peculiar imagery.\n\nThe name Nisroch, by the way, is evidently the same word as _nesher_,\nand bears even closer resemblance to the Arabic _niss'r_. This bird\nwas also the war standard of Assyria, just as the eagle is that of\nFrance, and the metaphors used by Habbakuk and Jeremiah had therefore\na doubly forcible sense.\n\nWe find the same bird employed as a visible emblem of Divine\nomnipresence and omniscience in the visions seen by Ezekiel and St.\nJohn: \"And every one had four faces; the first face was the face of a\ncherub, and the second face was the face of a man, and the third the\nface of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle\" (Ezek. x. 14).\nThen, in the Revelation, chap. iv. ver. 6, 7, is the account of a\nvision of very similar character: \"In the midst of the throne, and\nround about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and\nbehind.\n\n\"And the first beast was like a lion, and the second was like a calf,\nand the third beast had a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like\na flying eagle.\"\n\nFrom these passages we shall see that the Griffon Vulture was not held\nby the Scriptural writers in the contempt with which we are apt to\nregard it. Not having any Vultures resident in our country, for the\nsimple reason that there is not enough carrion in the whole of England\nto feed a single Vulture for a month, we have no practical knowledge\nof them, and are apt to confound, under the common title of Vulture,\nbirds of most dissimilar aspect. Some of them, especially those which\ninhabit the West Indies, are mean-looking, slouching, sneaking,\nobscene birds, which, even when brought to this country, and nourished\non fresh meat, cannot be regarded without inspiring a feeling of\ndisgust.\n\nBut there are others which are really grand and noble birds, which\nexcite admiration instead of disgust, and one of the chief among these\nis the Griffon Vulture. Scavenger though it be, it is not disgusting\nin its habits, and may even be called a cleanly bird. It is\nintelligent, after its way, and is quite as susceptible of human\nteaching as the falcon or the cormorant. It is not quarrelsome, and,\neven when feeding, does not try to drive away its neighbour, but feeds\nalongside of him with perfect amity and quiet.\n\nIn common with other birds of its order, the Griffon Vulture is a very\nlong-lived bird, and even this characteristic is noticed in the\nwell-known passage, \"Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all His\nbenefits: ... who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy\nyouth is renewed like the eagle's\" (Ps. ciii. 1, 5).\n\n [Illustration: THE VULTURE, OR EAGLE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"Wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered\n together.\"--MATT. xxiv. 28.]\n\nThis passage has often been absurdly misinterpreted by commentators\nwho have not appreciated the metaphorical style of all Oriental\npoetry. Taking the passage in its exact literal sense, and not knowing\nthat reference is made to the Vulture and not to the eagle,\nthey have taken for granted that the eagle had some mode of\nrenewing its youth, and, in fact, after becoming old, went through\nsome process by which it shook off the decrepitude of old age, and\nbecame young again. Others, seeing that such an interpretation was\nboth strained and far-fetched, have thought that reference was made to\nthe annual moult of the eagle, which they fancied to be of a very\nsevere character, the whole of the feathers being shed at once, so as\nto leave the bird naked and helpless, and then being restored with\nadded strength and beauty.\n\nIt is evident, however, that no such interpretation is needed, and\nthat the Psalmist, when using the expression \"renewing the youth like\nan eagle's,\" only employed a metaphorical expression significative of\nlongevity.\n\nIf we recapitulate the various passages in which the Nesher is\nmentioned in the Scriptures, we shall find that the sacred writers\nwere thoroughly acquainted with the bird, and that they wrote of it\nwith an occasional fulness and an invariable precision which shows how\nfamiliar they were with a bird at once so plentiful and so\nconspicuous.\n\nThe illustration represents one of the rocky gorges so plentiful in\nPalestine, inhabited by a number of Griffon Vultures. Some of them are\nfeeding upon the carcase of a dead animal, another is upon her nest,\nand several Vultures, who have gorged themselves with food after their\nfashion, are sitting listlessly on the rock, in some of the singular\npositions which this bird affects. There is, perhaps, no bird which\nhas a more curious set of attitudes than the Griffon Vulture, or which\nexhibits so different an aspect at various times.\n\nIn flight it is one of the most magnificent birds that can be seen,\nand even when perched it often retains a certain look of majesty and\ngrandeur. Sometimes, however, especially when basking in the sun, it\nassumes a series of attitudes which are absolutely grotesque, and\nconvert the noble-looking bird into a positively ludicrous object. At\none moment it will sit all hunched up, its head sunk between its\nshoulders, and one wing trailing behind it as if broken. At another it\nwill bend its legs and sit down on the ankle-joint, pushing its feet\nout in front, and supporting itself by the stiff feathers of its tail.\nOften it will crouch nearly flat on the ground, partly spread its\nwings, and allow their tips to rest on the earth, and sometimes it\nwill support nearly all the weight of its body on the wings, which\nrest, in a half doubled state, on the ground. I have before me a great\nnumber of sketches, taken in a single day, of the attitudes assumed by\none of these birds, every one of which is strikingly different from\nthe others, and transforms the whole shape of the bird so much that it\nis scarcely recognisable as the same individual.\n\n\n\n\nTHE EAGLE.\n\n Signification of the word _Asniyeh_--The Golden Eagle and its\n habits--The Imperial Eagle--Its solitary mode of life--The\n Short-toed Eagle--Its domestic habits and fondness for the\n society of man--The Osprey, or Fishing Eagle--Its mode of\n catching fish--Its distribution in Palestine.\n\n\nAs to the Eagle, rightly so called, there is little doubt that it is\none of the many birds of prey that seem to have been classed under the\ngeneral title of Asniyeh--the word which in the Authorized Version of\nthe Bible is rendered as Osprey. A similar confusion is observable in\nthe modern Arabic, one word, _ogab_, being applied indiscriminately to\nall the Eagles and the large _falconid\u00e6_.\n\nThe chief of the true Eagles, namely, the Golden Eagle (_Aquila\nchrysa\u00ebtos_), is one of the inhabitants of Palestine, and is seen\nfrequently, though never in great numbers. Indeed, its predacious\nhabits unfit it for associating with its kind. Any animal which lives\nchiefly, if not wholly, by the chase, requires a large district in\norder to enable it to live, and thus twenty or thirty eagles will be\nscattered over a district of twice the number of miles. Like the lion\namong the mammalia, the Eagle leads an almost solitary life, scarcely\never associating with any of its kind except its mate and its young.\n\n [Illustration: THE EAGLE.\n\n \"Though thou shouldest make thy nest as high as the eagle.\"--JER. xlix.\n 16.]\n\nAlthough it lives principally by the chase, it has no objection to\ncarrion, and, as has already been mentioned on page 342, may be seen\nfeeding on a dead animal in company with the lesser vultures,\nthough it retires before the lordly griffon. Being so thinly\nscattered, it would not be so conspicuous a bird as the griffon, which\nis not only very much larger, but associates in great numbers, and\nprobably on that account no definite species of Eagle seems to be\nmentioned in Holy Writ.\n\nFour or five species of Eagle are known to inhabit Palestine. There\nis, for example, the Imperial Eagle (_Aquila mogilnik_), which may be\ndistinguished from the Golden Eagle by a white patch on the shoulders,\nand the long, lancet-shaped feathers of the head and neck. These\nfeathers are of a fawn colour, and contrast beautifully with the deep\nblack-brown of the back and wings. It is not very often seen, being a\nbird that loves the forest, and that does not care to leave the\nshelter of the trees. It is tolerably common in Palestine.\n\nThen there are several of the allied species, of which the best\nexample is perhaps the Short-toed Eagle (_Circa\u00ebtus gallicus_), a bird\nwhich is extremely plentiful in the Holy Land--so plentiful indeed\nthat, as Mr. Tristram remarks, there are probably twice as many of the\nShort-toed Eagles in Palestine as of all the other species put\ntogether. The genus to which this bird belongs does not take rank with\nthe true Eagles, but is supposed by systematic naturalists to hold an\nintermediate place between the true Eagles and the ospreys.\n\nThe Short-toed Eagle is seldom a carrion-eater, preferring to kill its\nprey for itself. It feeds mostly on serpents and other reptiles, and\nis especially fond of frogs. It is a large and somewhat heavily built\nbird, lightness and swiftness being far less necessary than strength\nin taking the animals on which it feeds. It is rather more than two\nfeet in length, and is a decidedly handsome bird, the back being dark\nbrown, and the under parts white, covered with crescent-shaped black\nspots.\n\n\n\n\nTHE OSPREY.\n\n The Osprey, or Fishing Eagle--Its geographical range--Mode of\n securing prey--Structure of its feet--Its power of balancing\n itself in the air.\n\n\nWe now come to the Osprey itself (_Pandion halia\u00ebtus_), which was\nundoubtedly one of the birds grouped together under the collective\nterm Asniyeh. This word occurs only in the two passages in Deut. xiv.\nand Lev. xi. which have been several times quoted already, and need\nnot be mentioned again.\n\nThis fine bird is spread over a very large range of country, and is\nfound in the New World as well as the Old. In consequence of its\npeculiar habits, it is often called the Fishing Eagle.\n\nThe Osprey is essentially a fish-eater. It seems very strange that a\npredacious bird allied to the eagles, none of which birds can swim,\nmuch less dive, should obtain its living from the water. That the\ncormorant and other diving birds should do so is no matter of\nsurprise, inasmuch as they are able to pursue the fish in their own\nelement, and catch them by superior speed. But any bird which cannot\ndive, and which yet lives on fish, is forced to content itself with\nthose fish that come to the surface of the water, a mode of obtaining\na livelihood which does not appear to have much chance of success. Yet\nthe Osprey does on a large scale what the kingfisher does on a small\none, and contrives to find abundant food in the water.\n\nIts method of taking prey is almost exactly like that which is\nemployed by the kingfisher. When it goes out in search of food, it\nsoars into the air, and floats in circles over the water, watching\nevery inch of it as narrowly as a kestrel watches a stubble-field. No\nsooner does a fish rise toward the surface to take a fly, or to leap\ninto the air for sport, than the Osprey darts downwards, grasps the\nfish in its talons, drags the struggling prey from the water, and with\na scream of joy and triumph bears it away to shore, where it can be\ndevoured at leisure.\n\n [Illustration: THE OSPREY.\n\n \"These are they of which ye shall not eat; the eagle, and the\n ossifrage, and the osprey.\"\n\n DEUT. xiv. 12.]\n\nThe bird never dives, neither does it seize the fish with its beak\nlike the kingfisher. It plunges but slightly into the water, as\notherwise it would not be able to use its strong wings and\ncarry off its prey. In order to enable the bird to seize the hard\nand slippery body of the fish, it is furnished with long, very sharp,\nand boldly-hooked talons, which force themselves into the sides of the\nfish, and hold it as with grappling irons.\n\nIn order to enable it to hover over the water, and to watch the\nsurface carefully, it is possessed of wonderful powers of flight,\nbeing able to balance itself in one spot without seeming to move a\nwing, and having the singular facility of doing so even when a\ntolerably strong breeze is blowing. It has even been observed to\nmaintain its place unmoved when a sharp squall swept over the spot.\n\nAlthough not very plentiful in Palestine, nor indeed in any other\ncountry, it is seen throughout the whole of that country where it can\nfind a sufficiency of water. It prefers the sea-shore and the rivers\nof the coast, and is said to avoid the Sea of Galilee.\n\n\n\n\nTHE KITE, OR VULTURE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The word _Dayah_ and its signification--Dayah a collective term\n for different species of Kites--The Common or Red Kite plentiful\n in Palestine--Its piercing sight and habit of soaring--The Black\n Kite of Palestine and its habits--The Egyptian Kite--The Raah or\n Glede of Scripture--The Buzzards and their habits--The Peregrine\n Falcon an inhabitant of Central Palestine, and the Lanner of the\n eastern parts of the country.\n\n\nIn Lev. xi. 14 and Deut. xiv. 13, we find the Vulture among the list\nof birds which the Jews were not permitted to eat. The word which is\ntranslated as Vulture is _dayah_, and we find it occurring again in\nIsaiah xxxiv. 15, \"There shall the vultures also be gathered, every\none with her mate.\" There is no doubt, however, that this translation\nof the word is an incorrect one, and that it ought to be rendered as\nKITE. In Job xxviii. 7, there is a similar word, _ayah_, which is also\ntranslated as Vulture, and which is acknowledged to be not a Vulture,\nbut one of the Kites: \"There is a path which no fowl knoweth, and\nwhich the vulture's eye hath not seen.\" Both these words are nearly\nidentical with modern Arabic terms which are employed rather loosely\nto signify several species of Kite. Buxtorf, in his Hebrew Lexicon,\ngives the correct rendering, translating _dayah_ as _Milvus_, and the\nVulgate in one or two places gives the same translation, though in\nothers it renders the word as Vulture.\n\n [Illustration: THE KITE, OR VULTURE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_There is a path which no fowl knoweth, and which the vulture's eye\n hath not seen._\"\n\n JOB xxviii. 7.]\n\nMr. Tristram, who has given much attention to this subject, is\ninclined to refer the word _ayah_ to the Common Kite (_Milvus\nregalis_), which was once so plentiful in this country, and is now\nnearly extinct; and _dayah_ to the Black Kite (_Milvus atra_). He\nfounds this distinction on the different habits of the two species,\nthe Common or Red Kite being thinly scattered, and being in the habit\nof soaring into the air at very great heights, and the latter being\nvery plentiful and gregarious.\n\nWe will first take the Red Kite.\n\nThis bird is scattered all over Palestine, feeding chiefly on the\nsmaller birds, mice, reptiles, and fish. In the capture of fish the\nKite is almost as expert as the osprey, darting from a great height\ninto the water, and bearing off the fish in its claws. The wings of\nthis bird are very long and powerful, and bear it through the air in a\npeculiarly graceful flight. It is indeed in consequence of this flight\nthat it has been called the Glede, the word being derived from its\ngliding movements.\n\nThe sight of this bird is remarkably keen and piercing, and, from the\nvast elevation to which it soars when in search of food, it is able to\nsurvey the face of the country beneath, and to detect the partridge,\nquail, chicken, or other creature that will serve it for food. This\npiercing sight and habit of soaring render the passage in Job\npeculiarly appropriate to this species of Kite, though it does not\nexpress the habits of the other. Should the Kite suspect danger when\nforced to leave its nest, it escapes by darting rapidly into the air,\nand soaring at a vast height above the trees among which its home is\nmade. From that elevation it can act as a sentinel, and will not come\ndown again until it is assured of safety.\n\n\nOf the habits of the BLACK KITE (_Milvus atra_), Mr. Tristram gives an\nadmirable description. \"The habits of the bird bear out the allusion\nin Isa. xxxiv. 15, for it is, excepting during the winter three\nmonths, so numerous everywhere in Palestine as to be almost\ngregarious. It returns about the beginning of March, and scatters\nitself over the whole country, preferring especially the neighbourhood\nof valleys, where it is a welcome and unmolested guest. It does not\nappear to attack the poultry, among whom it may often be seen feeding\non garbage. It is very sociable, and the slaughter of a sheep at one\nof the tents will soon attract a large party of black kites, which\nswoop down regardless of man and guns, and enjoy a noisy scramble for\nthe refuse, chasing each other in a laughable fashion, and sometimes\nenabling the wily raven to steal off with the coveted morsel during\ntheir contentions. It is the butt of all the smaller scavengers, and\nis evidently most unpopular with the crows and daws, and even rollers,\nwho enjoy the amusement of teasing it in their tumbling flight, which\nis a manoeuvre most perplexing to the kite.\"\n\nThe same writer proceeds to mention that the Black Kite, unlike the\nred species, is very careless about the position of its nest, and\nnever even attempts to conceal it, sometimes building it in a tree,\nsometimes on a rock-ledge, and sometimes in a bush growing on the\nrocks. It seems indeed desirous of making the nest as conspicuous as\npossible, and hangs it all over with bits of cloth, strips of bark,\nwings of birds, and even the cast skins of serpents.\n\nAnother species (_Milvus \u00c6gyptiacus_) is sometimes called the Black\nKite from the dark hue of its plumage, but ought rather to retain the\ntitle of Egyptian Kite. Unlike the black kite, this bird is a great\nthief, and makes as much havoc among poultry as the red kite. It is\nalso a robber of other birds, and if it should happen to see a weaker\nbird with food, it is sure to attack and rob it. Like the black kite,\nit is fond of the society of man, and haunts the villages in great\nnumbers, for the purpose of eating the offal, which in Oriental towns\nis simply flung into the streets to be devoured by the dogs, vultures,\nkites, and other scavengers, without whom no village would be\nhabitable for a month.\n\n\nWhether the word _raah_, which is translated as Glede in Deut. xiv.\n13, among the list of birds which may not be eaten, is one of these\nspecies of Kite, or a bird of a different group, is a very doubtful\npoint. This is the only passage in which the word occurs, and we have\nbut small grounds for definitely identifying it with any one species.\nThe Hebrew Bible retains the word Glede, but affixes a mark of doubt\nto it, and several commentators are of opinion that the word is a\nwrong reading of _dayah_, which occurs in the parallel passage in Lev.\nxi. 14. The reading of the Septuagint follows this interpretation, and\nrenders it as Vulture in both cases. Buxtorf translates the word\n_raah_ as Rook, but suggests that _dayah_ is the correct reading.\n\nAccepting, however, the word _raah_, we shall find that it is derived\nfrom a root which signifies sight or vision, especially of some\nparticular object, so that a piercing sight would therefore be the\nchief characteristic of the bird, which, as we know, is one of the\nattributes of the Kites, together with other birds of prey, so that it\nevidently must be classed among the group with which we are now\nconcerned. It has been suggested that, granting the _raah_ to be a\nspecies distinct from the _dayah_, it is a collective term for the\nlarger falcons and buzzards, several species of which inhabit\nPalestine, and are not distinctly mentioned in the Bible.\n\nSeveral species of buzzard inhabit the Holy Land, and there is no\nparticular reason why they should be mentioned except by a collective\nname. Some of the buzzards are very large birds, and though their\nwings are short when compared with those of the vultures and eagles,\nthe flight of the bird is both powerful and graceful. It is not,\nhowever, remarkable for swiftness, and never was employed, like the\nfalcon, in catching other birds, being reckoned as one of the useless\nand cowardly birds of prey. In consonance with this opinion, to\ncompare a man to a buzzard was thought a most cutting insult.\n\n [Illustration: THE PEREGRINE FALCON, OR GLEDE OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_And the Glede, and the kite, and the vulture after his\n kind._\"--DEUT. xiv. 13.]\n\nAs a general rule, it does not chase its prey like the eagles or the\nlarge-winged falcons, but perches on a rock or tree, watches for some\nanimal on which it can feed, pounces on it, and returns to its post,\nthe whole movements being very like those of the flycatcher. This\nsluggishness of disposition, and the soft and almost owl-like plumage,\nhave been the means of bringing the bird into contempt among\nfalconers.\n\nAs to the large falcons, which seem to be included in the term _raah_,\nthe chief of them is the Peregrine Falcon (_Falco peregrinus_), which\nis tolerably common in the Holy Land. In his \"Land of Israel,\" Mr.\nTristram gives several notices of this bird, from which we may take\nthe following picture from a description of a scene at Endor. \"Dreary\nand desolate looked the plain, though of exuberant fertility. Here and\nthere might be seen a small flock of sheep or herd of cattle, tended\nby three or four mounted villagers, armed with their long firelocks,\nand pistols and swords, on the watch against any small party of\nmarauding cattle-lifters.\n\n\"Griffon vultures were wheeling in circles far over the rounded top of\nTabor; and here and there an eagle was soaring beneath them in search\nof food, but at a most inconvenient distance from our guns. Hariers\nwere sweeping more rapidly and closely over the ground, where lambs\nappeared to be their only prey; and a noble peregrine falcon, which in\nCentral Palestine does not give place to the more eastern lanner, was\nperched on an isolated rock, calmly surveying the scene, and\npermitting us to approach and scrutinize him at our leisure.\"\n\nThe habit of perching on the rock, as mentioned above, is very\ncharacteristic of the Peregrine Falcon, who loves the loftiest and\nmost craggy cliffs, and makes its nest in spots which can only be\nreached by a bold and experienced climber. The nests of this bird are\nnever built in close proximity, the Peregrine preferring to have its\nhome at least a mile from the nest of any other of its kinsfolk.\nSometimes it makes a nest in lofty trees, taking possession of the\ndeserted home of some other bird; but it loves the cliff better than\nthe tree, and seldom builds in the latter when the former is\nattainable.\n\nIn the passage from the \"Land of Israel\" is mentioned the LANNER\nFALCON (_Falco lanarius_), another of the larger falcons to which the\nterm _raah_ may have been applied.\n\nThis bird is much larger than the Peregrine Falcon, and, indeed, is\nvery little less than the great gerfalcon itself. It is one of the\nbirds that were reckoned among the noble falcons; and the female,\nwhich is much larger and stronger than the male, was employed for the\npurpose of chasing the kite, whose long and powerful wings could not\nalways save it from such a foe.\n\nAlthough the Lanner has been frequently mentioned among the British\nbirds, and the name is therefore familiar to us, it is not even a\nvisitor of our island. The mistake has occurred by an error in\nnomenclature, the young female Peregrine Falcon, which is much larger\nand darker than the male bird, having been erroneously called by the\nname of Lanner.\n\n [Illustration: THE LANNER FALCON.]\n\nIn the illustration, a pair of Lanner Falcons are depicted as pursuing\nsome of the rock-pigeons which abound in Palestine, the attitudes of\nboth birds being taken from life.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HAWK.\n\n The Netz or Hawk--Number of species probably grouped under that\n name--Rare occurrence of the word--The Sparrow-Hawk and its\n general habits--Its place of nesting--The Kestrel, or\n Wind-hover--Various names by which it is known in England--Its\n mode of feeding and curious flight--The Hariers--Probable\n derivation of the name--Species of Harier known to inhabit\n Palestine--Falconry apparently unknown to the ancient Jews.\n\n\nThere is no doubt that a considerable number of species are grouped\ntogether under the single title Netz, or Hawk, a word which is rightly\nenough translated. That a great number of birds should have been thus\nconfounded together is not surprising, seeing that even in this\ncountry and at the present time, the single word Hawk may signify any\none of at least twelve different species. The various falcons, the\nhariers, the kestrel, the sparrow-hawk, and the hobbies, are one and\nall called popularly by the name of Hawk, and it is therefore likely\nthat the Hebrew word Netz would signify as many species as the English\nword Hawk. From them we will select one or two of the principal\nspecies.\n\nIn the first place, the word is of very rare occurrence. We only find\nit three times. It first occurs in Lev. xi. 16, in which it is named,\ntogether with the eagle, the ossifrage, and many other birds, as among\nthe unclean creatures, to eat which was an abomination. It is next\nfound in the parallel passage in Deut. xiv. 15, neither of which\nportions of Scripture need be quoted at length.\n\nThat the word _netz_ was used in its collective sense is very evident\nfrom the addition which is made to it in both cases. The Hawk, \"after\nits kind,\" is forbidden, showing therefore that several kinds or\nspecies of Hawk were meant. Indeed, any specific detail would be quite\nneedless, as the collective term was quite a sufficient indication,\nand, having named the vultures, eagles, and larger birds of prey, the\nsimple word _netz_ was considered by the sacred writer as expressing\nthe rest of the birds of prey.\n\nWe find the word once more in that part of the Bible to which we\nusually look for any reference to natural history. In Job xxxix. 26,\nwe have the words, \"Doth the hawk fly by thy wisdom, and turn [or\nstretch] her wings toward the south?\" The precise signification of\nthis passage is rather doubtful, but it is generally considered to\nrefer to the migration of several of the Hawk tribe. That the bird in\nquestion was distinguished for its power of flight is evident from the\nfact that the sacred poet has selected that one attribute as the most\ncharacteristic of the Netz.\n\nTaking first the typical example of the Hawks, we find that the\nSPARROW-HAWK (_Accipiter nisus_) is plentiful in Palestine, finding\nabundant food in the smaller birds of the country. It selects for its\nnest just the spots which are so plentiful in the Holy Land, _i.e._\nthe crannies of rocks, and the tops of tall trees. Sometimes it builds\nin deserted ruins, but its favourite spot seems to be the lofty\ntree-top, and, in default of that, the rock-crevice. It seldom builds\na nest of its own, but takes possession of that which has been made by\nsome other bird. Some ornithologists think that it looks out for a\nconvenient nest, say of the crow or magpie, and then ejects the\nrightful owner. I am inclined to think, however, that it mostly takes\npossession of a nest that is already deserted, without running the\nrisk of fighting such enemies as a pair of angry magpies. This opinion\nis strengthened by the fact that the bird resorts to the same nest\nyear after year.\n\nIt is a bold and dashing bird, though of no great size, and when wild\nand free displays a courage which it seems to lose in captivity. As is\nthe case with so many of the birds, the female is much larger than her\nmate, the latter weighing about six ounces, and measuring about a foot\nin length, and the former weighing above nine ounces, and measuring\nabout fifteen inches in length.\n\n\nThe most plentiful of the smaller Hawks of Palestine is the COMMON\nKESTREL (_Tinnunculus alaudarius_). This is the same species with\nwhich we are so familiar in England under the names of Kestrel,\nWind-hover, and Stannel Hawk.\n\n [Illustration: KESTREL.\n\n \"_Doth the Hawk fly by thy wisdom?_\"--JOB xxxix. 26.]\n\nIt derives its name of Wind-hover from its remarkable habit of\nhovering, head to windward, over some spot for many minutes together.\nThis action is always performed at a moderate distance from the\nground; some naturalists saying that the Hawk in question never hovers\nat an elevation exceeding forty feet, while others, myself included,\nhave seen the bird hovering at a height of twice as many yards.\nGenerally, however, it prefers a lower distance, and is able by\nemploying this manoeuvre to survey a tolerably large space beneath. As\nits food consists in a very great measure of field-mice, the Kestrel\nis thus able by means of its telescopic eyesight to see if a mouse\nrises from its hole; and if it should do so, the bird drops on it and\nsecures it in its claws.\n\nUnlike the sparrow-hawk, the Kestrel is undoubtedly gregarious, and\nwill build its nest in close proximity to the habitations of other\nbirds, a number of nests being often found within a few yards of each\nother. Mr. Tristram remarks that he has found its nest in the recesses\nof the caverns occupied by the griffon vultures, and that the Kestrel\nalso builds close to the eagles, and is the only bird which is\npermitted to do so. It also builds in company with the jackdaw.\n\nSeveral species of Kestrel are known, and of them at least two inhabit\nthe Holy Land, the second being a much smaller bird than the Common\nKestrel, and feeding almost entirely on insects, which it catches with\nits claws, the common chafers forming its usual prey. Great numbers of\nthese birds live together, and as they rather affect the society of\nmankind, they are fond of building their nests in convenient crannies\nin the mosques or churches. Independently of its smaller size, it may\nbe distinguished from the Common Kestrel by the whiteness of its\nclaws.\n\nThe illustration is drawn from a sketch taken from life. The bird\nhovered so near a house, and remained so long in one place, that the\nartist fixed a telescope and secured an exact sketch of the bird in\nthe peculiar attitude which it is so fond of assuming. After a while,\nthe Kestrel ascended to a higher elevation, and then resumed its\nhovering, in the attitude which is shown in the upper figure. In\nconsequence of the great abundance of this species in Palestine, and\nthe peculiarly conspicuous mode of balancing itself in the air while\nin search of prey, we may feel sure that the sacred writers had it\nspecially in their minds when they used the collective term Netz.\n\nThe Kestrel has a very large geographical range, being plentiful not\nonly in England and Palestine, but in Northern and Southern Europe,\nthroughout the greater part of Asia, in Siberia, and in portions of\nAfrica. The bird, therefore, is capable of enduring both heat and\ncold, and, as is often the case with those creatures that are useful\nto man, is a perfect cosmopolitan.\n\nIt is easily trained, and, although in the old hawking days it was\nconsidered a bird which a noble could not carry, it can be trained to\nchase the smaller birds as successfully as the falcons can be taught\nto pursue the heron. The name Tinnunculus is supposed by some to have\nbeen given to the bird in allusion to its peculiar cry, which is\nclear, shrill, and consists of a single note several times repeated.\n\nOn page 361 the reader may see a representation of a pair of HARIER\nHAWKS flying below the rock on which the peregrine falcon has\nperched, and engaged in pursuing one of the smaller birds.\n\nThey have been introduced because several species of Harier are to be\nfound in Palestine, where they take, among the plains and lowlands,\nthe place which is occupied by the other hawks and falcons among the\nrocks.\n\nThe name of Harier appears to be given to these birds on account of\ntheir habit of regularly quartering the ground over which they fly\nwhen in search of prey, just like hounds when searching for hares.\nThis bird is essentially a haunter of flat and marshy lands, where it\nfinds frogs, mice, lizards, on which it usually feeds. It does not,\nhowever, confine itself to such food, but will chase and kill most of\nthe smaller birds, and occasionally will catch even the leveret, the\nrabbit, the partridge, and the curlew.\n\nWhen it chases winged prey, it seldom seizes the bird in the air, but\nalmost invariably keeps above it, and gradually drives it to the\nground. It will be seen, therefore, that its flight is mostly low, as\nsuits the localities in which it lives, and it seldom soars to any\ngreat height, except when it amuses itself by rising and wheeling in\ncircles together with its mate. This proceeding generally takes place\nbefore nest-building. The usual flight is a mixture of that of the\nkestrel and the falcon, the Harier sometimes poising itself over some\nparticular spot, and at others shooting forwards through the air with\nmotionless wings.\n\nUnlike the falcons and most of the hawks, the Harier does not as a\nrule perch on rocks, but prefers to sit very upright on the ground,\nperching generally on a mole-hill, stone, or some similar elevation.\nEven its nest is made on the ground, and is composed of reeds, sedges,\nsticks, and similar matter, materials that can be procured from marshy\nland. The nest is always elevated a foot or so from the ground, and\nhas occasionally been found on the top of a mound more than a yard in\nheight. It is, however, conjectured that in such cases the mound is\nmade by one nest being built upon the remains of another. The object\nof the elevated nest is probably to preserve the eggs in case of a\nflood.\n\nAt least five species of Hariers are known to exist in the Holy Land,\ntwo of which are among the British birds, namely, the Marsh Harier\n(_Circus \u00e6ruginosus_), sometimes called the Duck Hawk and the Moor\nBuzzard, and the Hen Harier (_Circus cyaneus_), sometimes called the\nWhite Hawk, Dove Hawk, or Blue Hawk, on account of the plumage of the\nmale, which differs greatly according to age; and the Ring-tailed\nHawk, on account of the dark bars which appear on the tail of the\nfemale. All the Hariers are remarkable for the Circlet of feathers\nthat surrounds the eyes, and which resembles in a lesser degree the\nbold feather-circle around the eye of the owl tribe.\n\n\nBefore taking leave of the Hawks, it is as well to notice the entire\nabsence in the Scriptures of any reference to falconry. Now, seeing\nthat the art of catching birds and animals by means of Hawks is a\nfavourite amusement among Orientals, as has already been mentioned\nwhen treating of the gazelle (page 139), and knowing the unchanging\ncharacter of the East, we cannot but think it remarkable that no\nreference should be made to this sport in the Scriptures.\n\nIt is true that in Palestine itself there would be but little scope\nfor falconry, the rough hilly ground and abundance of cultivated soil\nrendering such an amusement almost impossible. Besides, the use of the\nfalcon implies that of the horse, and, as we have already seen, the\nhorse was scarcely ever used except for military purposes.\n\nHad, therefore, the experience of the Israelites been confined to\nPalestine, there would have been good reason for the silence of the\nsacred writers on this subject. But when we remember that the\nsurrounding country is well adapted for falconry, that the amusement\nis practised there at the present day, and that the Israelites passed\nso many years as captives in other countries, we can but wonder that\nthe Hawks should never be mentioned as aids to bird-catching. We find\nthat other bird-catching implements are freely mentioned and employed\nas familiar symbols, such as the gin, the net, the snare, the trap,\nand so forth; but that there is not a single passage in which the\nHawks are mentioned as employed in falconry.\n\n\n\n\nTHE OWL.\n\n The words which have been translated as Owl--The C\u00f4s, or Little\n Owl--Use made of the Little Owl in bird-catching--Habits of the\n bird--The Barn, Screech, or White Owl a native of Palestine--The\n Yansh\u00fbph, or Egyptian Eagle Owl--Its food and nest--The Lilith,\n or Night Monster--Various interpretations of the word--The\n Kippoz probably identical with the Scops Owl, or Marouf.\n\n\nIn various parts of the Old Testament there occur several words which\nare translated as OWL in the Authorized Version, and in most cases the\nrendering is acknowledged to be the correct one, while in one or two\ninstances there is a difference of opinion on the subject.\n\nIn Lev. xi. 16, 17, we find the following birds reckoned among those\nwhich are an abomination, and which might not be eaten by the\nIsraelites: \"The owl, and the night-hawk, and the cuckoo, and the hawk\nafter his kind;\n\n\"And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl.\"\n\nHere, then, we have in close proximity the word Owl repeated three\ntimes, and the same repetition occurs in the parallel passage in Deut.\nxiv. Now the words which are here translated as Owl are totally\ndifferent words in the Hebrew, so that if we leave them untranslated,\nthe passages will run as follow: \"And the Bath-haya'anah, and the\nnight-hawk, and the cuckoo, and the hawk after his kind;\n\n\"And the C\u00f4s, and the cormorant, and the Yansh\u00fbph.\"\n\nTaking these words in order, we find in the first place that the\nJewish Bible accepts the translation of the words _c\u00f4s_ and\n_yansh\u00fbph_, merely affixing to them the mark of doubt. But it\ntranslates the word _bath-haya'anah_ as Ostrich, without adding the\ndoubtful mark. Now the same word occurs in several other passages of\nScripture, the first being in Job xxx. 29: \"I am a brother to dragons,\nand a companion to owls.\" In the marginal reading of the Authorized\nVersion, which, as the reader must bear in mind, is of equal value\nwith the text, the rendering is the same as that of the Jewish Bible,\nand in several other passages the same reading is followed. We\ntherefore accept the word _bath-haya'anah_ as the ostrich, and dismiss\nit from among the owls.\n\n\nComing now to the other words, we find in the passages already quoted\nthe words _c\u00f4s_ and _yansh\u00fbph_. Both those words occur in other parts\nof Scripture, and evidently are the names of nocturnal birds that\nhaunt ruins and lonely places. Taking them in order, we find the word\n_c\u00f4s_ to occur again in Ps. cii. 6: \"I am like a pelican of the\nwilderness: I am like an owl of the desert.\" The Psalm in which this\npassage occurs is a penitential prayer, in which the writer uses many\nof the metaphors employed by Job when lamenting his afflictions, and\ndescribes himself as left alone among men.\n\nThe simile is equally just and feasible in this case, the Owl being\nessentially a bird of night, and associated with solitude and gloom.\nThe particular species which is signified by the word _c\u00f4s_ bears but\nvery slightly on the subject, inasmuch as in general habits all the\ntrue Owls are very similar in hiding by day in their nests, and coming\nout at night to hunt for prey, their melancholy hoot, or startling\nshriek, breaking the silence of the night.\n\nStill it is necessary to identify, if we can, some species with the\nword _c\u00f4s_, and it is very likely that the Little Owl, or Boomah of\nthe Arabs (_Athene Persica_), is the bird which is signified by the\nword _c\u00f4s_. This species is probably identical with the Little Night\nOwl of England (_Athene noctua_). Though rare in England, it is very\ncommon in many parts of the Continent where it is much valued by\nbird-catchers, who employ it as a means of attracting small birds to\ntheir traps. They place it on the top of a long pole, and carry it\ninto the fields, where they plant the pole in the ground. This Owl has\na curious habit of swaying its body backwards and forwards, and is\nsure to attract the notice of all the small birds in the\nneighbourhood. It is well known that the smaller birds have a peculiar\nhatred to the Owl, and never can pass it without mobbing it,\nassembling in great numbers, and so intent on their occupation that\nthey seem to be incapable of perceiving anything but the object of\ntheir hatred. Even rooks, magpies, and hawks are taken by this simple\ndevice.\n\nWhether or not the Little Owl was used for this object by the ancient\ninhabitants of Palestine is rather doubtful; but as they certainly did\nso employ decoy birds for the purpose of attracting game, it is not\nunlikely that the Little Owl was found to serve as a decoy. We shall\nlearn more about the system of decoy-birds when we come to the\npartridge.\n\n [Illustration: THE LITTLE OWL\n\n \"_I am like an owl of the desert._\"--PS. cii. 6.]\n\nThe Little Owl is to be found in almost every locality, caring little\nwhether it takes up its residence in cultivated grounds, in villages,\namong deserted ruins, or in places where man has never lived. As,\nhowever, it is protected by the natives, it prefers the neighbourhood\nof villages, and may be seen quietly perched in some favourite spot,\nnot taking the trouble to move unless it be approached closely. And to\ndetect a perched Owl is not at all an easy matter, as the bird has a\nway of selecting some spot where the colours of its plumage harmonize\nso well with the surrounding objects that the large eyes are often the\nfirst indication of its presence. Many a time I have gone to search\nafter Owls, and only been made aware of them by the sharp angry snap\nthat they make when startled.\n\nThe name _Athene_, by the way, has been given to this Owl because it\nis the species selected by the Greeks as the emblem of wisdom.\n\nThe common BARN OWL of England (_Strix flammea_) also inhabits\nPalestine, and if, as is likely to be the case, the word c\u00f4s is a\ncollective term under which several species are grouped together, the\nBarn or White Owl is likely to be one of them.\n\nLike the Little Owl, it affects the neighbourhood of man, though it\nmay be found in ruins and similar localities. An old ruined castle is\nsure to be tenanted by the Barn Owl, whose nightly shrieks have so\noften terrified the belated wanderer, and made him fancy that the\nplace was haunted by disturbed spirits. Such being the case in\nEngland, it is likely that in the East, where popular superstition has\npeopled every well with its jinn and every ruin with its spirit, the\nnocturnal cry of this bird, which is often called the Screech Owl from\nits note, should be exceedingly terrifying, and would impress itself\non the minds of sacred writers as a fit image of solitude, terror, and\ndesolation.\n\nThe Screech Owl is scarcely less plentiful in Palestine than the\nLittle Owl, and, whether or not it be mentioned under a separate name,\nis sure to be one of the birds to which allusion is made in the\nScriptures.\n\n\nAnother name now rises before us: this is the Yansh\u00fbph, translated as\nthe Great Owl, a word which occurs not only in the prohibitory\npassages of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, but in the Book of Isaiah. In\nthat book, ch. xxxiv. ver. 10, 11, we find the following passage:\n\"From generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass\nthrough it for ever and ever.\n\n\"But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl\n(_yansh\u00fbph_) also and the raven shall dwell in it: and He shall\nstretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of\nemptiness.\" The Jewish Bible follows the same reading.\n\nIt is most probable that the Great Owl or Yansh\u00fbph is the EGYPTIAN\nEAGLE OWL (_Bubo ascalaphus_), a bird which is closely allied to the\ngreat Eagle Owl of Europe (_Bubo maximus_), and the Virginian Eared\nOwl (_Bubo Virginianus_) of America. This fine bird measures some two\nfeet in length, and looks much larger than its real size, owing to the\nthick coating of feathers which it wears in common with all true Owls,\nand the ear-like feather tufts on the top of its head, which it can\nraise or depress at pleasure. Its plumage is light tawny.\n\nThis bird has a special predilection for deserted places and ruins,\nand may at the present time be seen on the very spots of which the\nprophet spoke in his prediction. It is very plentiful in Egypt, where\nthe vast ruins are the only relics of a creed long passed away or\nmodified into other forms of religion, and its presence only\nintensifies rather than diminishes the feeling of loneliness that\noppresses the traveller as he passes among the ruins.\n\nThe European Eagle Owl has all the habits of its Asiatic congener. It\ndwells in places far from the neighbourhood of man, and during the day\nis hidden in some deep and dark recess, its enormous eyes not being\nable to endure the light of day. In the evening it issues from its\nretreat, and begins its search after prey, which consists of various\nbirds, quadrupeds, reptiles, fish, and even insects when it can find\nnothing better.\n\nOn account of its comparatively large dimensions, it is able to\novercome even the full-grown hare and rabbit, while the lamb and the\nyoung fawn occasionally fall victims to its voracity. It seems never\nto chase any creature on the wing, but floats silently through the\nair, its soft and downy plumage deadening the sound of its progress,\nand suddenly drops on the unsuspecting prey while it is on the ground.\n\nThe nest of this Owl is made in the crevices of rocks, or in ruins,\nand is a very large one, composed of sticks and twigs, lined with a\ntolerably large heap of dried herbage, the parent Owls returning to\nthe same spot year after year. Should it not be able to find either a\nrock or a ruin, it contents itself with a hollow in the ground, and\nthere lays its eggs, which are generally two in number, though\noccasionally a third egg is found. The Egyptian Eagle Owl does much\nthe same thing, burrowing in sand-banks, and retreating, if it fears\ndanger, into the hollow where its nest has been made.\n\nIn the large illustration the two last-mentioned species are given.\nThe Egyptian Eagle Owl is seen with its back towards the spectator,\ngrasping in its talons a dead hare, and with ear-tufts erect is\nlooking towards the Barn Owl, which is contemplating in mingled anger\nand fear the proceedings of the larger bird. Near them is perched a\nraven, in order to carry out more fully the prophetic words, \"the owl\nalso and the raven shall dwell in it.\"\n\n\nTwo more passages yet remain in which the word Owl is mentioned, and,\ncuriously enough, both of them are found in the Book of Isaiah, the\npoet-prophet, who seized with a poet's intuition on the natural\nobjects around him, and converted the simplest and most familiar\nincidents into glowing imagery and powerful metaphor.\n\nIf the reader will refer to Isaiah xxxiv. 13-15, he will find the\nfollowing passages, which are, in fact, a continuation of the prophecy\nagainst Idumea, which has already been quoted. \"And thorns shall come\nup in her palaces, nettles and brambles in the fortresses thereof: and\nit shall be an habitation of dragons, and a court for owls.\n\n\"The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of\nthe island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl\nalso shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.\n\n\"There shall the great owl make her nest, and lay, and hatch, and\ngather under her shadow.\"\n\nIt has been already mentioned that the word which is translated as\nOwl, in the first of these passages, is _bath-haya'anah_, which is\ngenerally considered to signify the ostrich. In verse 14 we come to a\nnew word, namely, _lilith_. In the marginal reading of the Authorized\nVersion, this word is rendered as \"night monster,\" and the Jewish\nBible takes nearly the same view of the word by translating it as \"a\nnocturnal one,\" evidently basing this interpretation upon the\nderivation of the word. Several Hebraists have thought that the word\n_lilith_ merely represents some mythological being, like the dread\nLamia of the ancients, a mixture of the material and spiritual--too\nethereal to be seen by daylight, and too gross to be above the\nrequirements of human food. The blood of mankind was the food of these\nfearful beings, and, according to old ideas, they could only live\namong ruins and desert places, where they concealed themselves during\nthe day at the bottoms of wells or the recesses of rock-caverns, and\nstole out at night to seize on some unlucky wanderer, and suck his\nblood as he slept.\n\nThe reader may remember that even our very imperfect version of the\n\"Arabian Nights\" repeatedly alludes to this belief, the evil spirit\nbeing almost invariably represented as dwelling in ruins, rocky\nplaces, and the interiors of wells.\n\nAlthough it is very possible that the prophet may have referred to\nsome of the mythological beings which were so universally supposed to\ninhabit deserted spots, and thus to have employed the word _lilith_ as\na term which he did not intend to be taken otherwise than\nmetaphorically, it is equally possible that some nocturnal bird may\nhave been meant, and in that case the bird in question must almost\ncertainly have been an Owl of some kind. As to the particular species\nof Owl, that is a question which cannot be satisfactorily answered,\nespecially as so many scholars find reason to doubt whether the word\n_lilith_ represents an Owl, or indeed any ordinary inhabitant of\nearth. As, therefore, we have no data whereon to found a positive\nopinion, the question will be allowed to remain an open one.\n\nThe last word which is translated as Owl is _kippoz_, and occurs in\nch. xxxiv. 15: \"There shall the great owl make her nest.\"\n\n [Illustration: THE OWL.\n\n \"I am a companion to owls.\"--JOB. xxx. 29.]\n\nMany Hebraists think that in this case the word _kippoz_ is a mere\nclerical error for _kippod_, or hedgehog, and have translated the\npassage accordingly. The Septuagint and the Vulgate follow this\nreading; Buxtorf, in his Hebrew Lexicon, translates _kippoz_ as\nThrush, deriving the name from the dipping character of its flight.\nThe Jewish Bible, following several other authorities, renders the\nword as \"arrow-snake,\" while several scholars translate it as \"darting\nserpent.\" This interpretation, however, is scarcely tenable, as the\ndescription of the Kippoz as making its nest, laying its eggs, and\ngathering them under its shadow, clearly points to a bird, and not a\nreptile. It is very true that the boa or python snake has been seen to\ncoil itself round a heap of its eggs, but the sacred writer could\nhardly have had many opportunities of seeing such an act, while the\ncustom of a bird gathering her young under the shadow of her wings\nmust have been perfectly familiar to him. There is, moreover, the\nfact that the context speaks of the vultures, so that a bird\nof some kind was evidently in the mind of the writer. Mr.\nTristram suggests that the Kippoz might be intended for the Scops Owl,\ncalled Marouf by the Arabs, and which is very common about ruins,\ncaves, and the old walls of towns. Its note is well represented by the\nword _kippoz_.\n\n\"It is a migrant, returning to Palestine in spring. It is the smallest\nowl in the country, being little more than seven inches in length,\nwith long ear-tufts, and its whole plumage most delicately mottled and\nspeckled with grey and light brown.\"\n\nThis species is very plentiful on the continent of Europe, though it\nis rare in the British Isles. It feeds, as might be presumed from its\ndiminutive size, on mice, small reptiles, and insects. Its scientific\nname, according to the nomenclature of the British Museum, is\n_Ephialtes Scops_.\n\n\n\n\nTHE NIGHT-HAWK.\n\n Different interpretations of the word Tachm\u00e2s--Probability that\n it signifies the Nightjar--Various names of the bird--Its\n remarkable jarring cry, and wheeling flight--Mode of\n feeding--Boldness of the bird--Deceptive appearance of its size.\n\n\nWe next come to the vexed question of the word Tachm\u00e2s, which is\nrendered in the Authorized Version as NIGHT-HAWK.\n\nThis word only occurs among the list of prohibited birds (see Lev. xi.\n16, and Deut. xiv. 15), and has caused great controversies among\ncommentators. Some Hebraists have thought that the male ostrich was\nsignified by _tachm\u00e2s_, the word _bath-haya'anah_ being supposed by\nthem to signify the female ostrich. It is hardly probable, however,\nthat the sacred writer should have mentioned separately the sexes of\nthe same species, and we must therefore look for some other\ninterpretation.\n\nGoing to the opposite extreme of size, some scholars have translated\n_tachm\u00e2s_ as Swallow. This again is not a very probable rendering, as\nthe swallow would be too small a bird to be specially named in the\nprohibitory list. The balance of probability seems to lie between two\ninterpretations,--namely, that which considers the word _tachm\u00e2s_ to\nsignify the Night-hawk, and that which translates it as Owl. For both\nof these interpretations much is to be said, and it cannot be denied\nthat of the two the latter is perhaps the preferable. If so, the White\nor Barn Owl is probably the particular species to which reference is\nmade.\n\n [Illustration: THE NIGHT-HAWK.\n\n \"_The owl, and the night-hawk, and the cuckoo._\"--DEUT. xiv. 15.]\n\nStill, many commentators think that the Night-hawk or Nightjar is the\nbird which is signified by the word _tachm\u00e2s_; and, as we have already\ntreated of the owls, we will accept the rendering of the Authorized\nVersion. Moreover, the Jewish Bible follows the same translation, and\nrenders _tachm\u00e2s_ as Night-hawk, but affixes the mark of doubt.\n\nIt is not unlikely that the Jews may have reckoned this bird among the\nowls, just as is the case with the uneducated among ourselves, who\npopularly speak of the Nightjar as the Fern Owl, Churn Owl, or Jar\nOwl, the two last names being given to it on account of its peculiar\ncry. There are few birds, indeed, which have received a greater\nvariety of popular names, for, besides the Goatsucker and the five\nwhich have already been mentioned, there are the Wheel-bird and\nDor-hawk, the former of these names having been given to the bird on\naccount of its wheeling round the trees while seeking for prey, and\nthe latter on account of the dor-beetles on which it largely feeds.\n\nThis curious variety of names is probably due to the very conspicuous\ncharacter of the Nightjar, its strange, jarring, weird-like cry\nforcing itself on the ear of the least attentive, as it breaks the\nsilence of night. It hardly seems like the cry of a bird, but rather\nresembles the sound of a pallet falling on the cogs of a\nrapidly-working wheel. It begins in the dusk of evening, the long,\njarring note being rolled out almost interminably, until the hearer\nwonders how the bird can have breath enough for such a prolonged\nsound. The hearer may hold his breath as long as he can, take a full\ninspiration, hold his breath afresh, and repeat this process over and\nover again, and yet the Nightjar continues to trill out its rapid\nnotes without a moment's cessation for breath, the sound now rising\nshrill and clear, and now sinking as if the bird were far off, but\nnever ceasing for an instant.\n\nThis remarkable cry has caused the uneducated rustics to look upon the\nbird with superstitious dread, every one knowing its cry full well,\nthough to many the bird is unknown except by its voice. It is probable\nthat, in the days when Moses wrote the Law, so conspicuous a bird was\nwell known to the Jews, and we may therefore conjecture that it was\none of those birds which he would specially mention by name.\n\nThe general habits of the Nightjar are quite as remarkable as its\nnote. It feeds on the wing, chasing and capturing the various moths,\nbeetles, and other insects that fly abroad by night. It may be seen\nwheeling round the branches of some tree, the oak being a special\nfavourite, sometimes circling round it, and sometimes rising high in\nthe air, and the next moment skimming along the ground. Suddenly it\nwill disappear, and next moment its long trilling cry is heard from\namong the branches of the tree round which it has been flying. To see\nit while singing is almost impossible, for it has a habit of sitting\nlongitudinally on the branch, and not across it, like most birds, so\nthat the outline of its body cannot be distinguished from that of the\nbough on which it is seated. As suddenly as it began, the sound\nceases, and simultaneously the bird may be seen wheeling again through\nthe air with its noiseless flight.\n\nBeing a very bold bird, and not much afraid of man, it allows a\ncareful observer to watch its movements clearly. I have often stood\nclose to the tree round which several Nightjars were circling, and\nseen them chase their prey to the ground within a yard or two of the\nspot on which I was standing. The flight of the Nightjar is singularly\ngraceful. Swift as the swallow itself, it presents a command of wing\nthat is really wonderful, gliding through the air with consummate\nease, wheeling and doubling in pursuit of some active moth, whose\nwhite wings glitter against the dark background, while the sober\nplumage of its pursuer is scarcely visible, passing often within a few\nfeet of the spectator, and yet not a sound or a rustle will reach his\nears. Sometimes the bird is said to strike its wings together over its\nback, so as to produce a sharp snapping sound, intended to express\nanger at the presence of the intruder. I never, however, heard this\nsound, though I have watched the bird so often.\n\nOwing to the soft plumage with which it is clad, this bird, like the\nowls, looks larger than really is the case. It is between ten and\neleven inches in length, with an expanse of wing of twenty inches, and\nyet weighs rather less than three ounces. Its large mouth, like that\nof the swallow tribe, opens as far as the eyes, and is furnished with\na set of _vibriss\u00e6_ or bristles, which remind the observer of the\n\"whale-bone\" which is set on the jaw of the Greenland whale. The\nscientific name of the bird is _Caprimulgus Europ\u00e6us_.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SWALLOW.\n\n Identification of the smaller birds--Oriental indifference to\n natural history--Use of collective terms--The\n Swallow--Signification of the word _Deror_--The Bird of\n Liberty--Swallows and Swifts--The Sunbirds and\n Bee-eaters--Variety of small birds found in Palestine--The\n Swallows of Palestine--Swallows protected by man in various\n countries--Nesting of the Swallow--The Rufous Swallow and\n Martin--The Sis or Swift--Various species of Swift inhabiting\n the Holy Land--Talmudical notions of the Swift or Swallow--The\n leper and his offering--The cooking pot and the sacrificial\n vessel--Signification of the word _Tzippor-deror_.\n\n\nDifficult as is the identification of the mammalia mentioned in the\nBible, that of the birds is much more intricate.\n\nSome of the larger birds can be identified with tolerable certainty,\nbut when we come to the smaller and less conspicuous species, we are\nat once lost in uncertainty, and at the best can only offer\nconjectures. The fact is, the Jews of old had no idea of\ndiscriminating between the smaller birds, unless they happened to be\ntolerably conspicuous by plumage or by voice. We need not be much\nsurprised at this. The Orientals of the present day do precisely the\nsame thing, and not only fail to discriminate between the smaller\nbirds, but absolutely have no names for them.\n\nBy them, the shrikes, the swallows, the starlings, the thrushes, the\nlarks, the warblers, and all the smaller birds, are called by a common\ntitle, derived from the twittering sound of their voices, only one or\ntwo of them having any distinctive titles. They look upon the birds\nmuch as persons ignorant of entomology look at a collection of moths.\nThere is not much difficulty in discriminating between the great\nhawk-moths, and perhaps in giving a name to one or two of them which\nare specially noticeable for any peculiarity of form or colour; but\nwhen they come to the \"Rustics,\" the \"Carpets,\" the \"Wainscots,\" and\nsimilar groups, they are utterly lost; and, though they may be able to\nsee the characteristic marks when the moths are placed side by side,\nthey are incapable of distinguishing them separately, and, to their\nuneducated eyes, twenty or thirty species appear absolutely alike.\n\nI believe that there is no country where a knowledge of practical\nnatural history is so widely extended as in England, and yet how few\neducated persons are there who, if taken along a country lane, can\nname the commonest weed or insect, or distinguish between a sparrow, a\nlinnet, a hedge-sparrow, and a chaffinch. Nay, how many are there who,\nif challenged even to repeat the names of twelve little birds, would\nbe unable to do so without some consideration, much less to know them\nif the birds were placed before them.\n\nSuch being the case in this country, where the capability of\nobservation is more or less cultivated in every educated person, we\nmay well expect that a profound ignorance on the subject should exist\nin countries where that faculty is absolutely neglected as a matter of\neducation. Moreover, in England we have a comparatively limited list\nof birds, whereas in Palestine are found nearly all those which are\nreckoned among British birds, and many other species besides. Those\nwhich reside in England reside also for the most part in Palestine,\nwhile the greater part of the migratory birds pass, as we might\nexpect, into the Holy Land and the neighbouring countries.\n\nIf then we put together the two facts of an unobservant people and a\nvastly extended fauna, we shall not wonder that so many collective\nterms are used in the Scriptures, one word often doing duty for twenty\nor thirty species. The only plan, therefore, which can be adopted, is\nto mention generally the birds which were probably grouped under one\nname, and to describe briefly one or two of the most prominent.\n\nIt is, however, rather remarkable that the song of birds does not\nappear to be noticed by the sacred writers. We might expect that\nseveral of the prophets, especially Isaiah, the great sacred poet, who\ndrew so many of his images from natural objects, would have found in\nthe song of birds some metaphor expressive of sweetness or joy. We\nmight expect that in the Book of Job, in which so many creatures are\nmentioned, the singing of birds would be brought as prominently\nforward as the neck clothed with thunder of the horse, the tameless\nfreedom of the wild ass, the voracity of the vulture, and the\nswiftness of the ostrich. We might expect the song of birds to be\nmentioned by Amos, the herdman of Tekoa, who introduces into his\nrugged poem the rear of the old lion and the wail of the cub, the\nvenom of the serpent hidden in the wattled wall of the herdman's hut,\nand the ravages of the palmer-worm among the olives. Above all, we\nmight expect that in the Psalms there would be many allusions to the\nnotes of the various birds which have formed such fruitful themes for\nthe poets of later times. There are, however, in the whole of the\nScriptures but two passages in which the song of birds is mentioned,\nand even in these only a passing allusion is made.\n\nOne of them occurs in Psalm civ. 12: \"By them (_i.e._ the springs of\nwater) shall the fowls of the heaven have their habitation, which sing\namong the branches.\" This passage is perhaps rendered more closely in\nthe Jewish Bible: \"Over them dwell the fowls of the heaven; they let\ntheir voices resound (or give their voice) from between the foliage.\"\n\nThe other occurs in Eccles. xii. 4: \"And the doors shall be shut in\nthe streets, when the sound of the grinding is low, and he shall rise\nup at the voice of the bird, and all the daughters of music shall be\nbrought low.\" The word which is here translated as \"bird,\" is that\nwhich is rendered in some places as \"sparrow,\" in others as \"fowl,\"\nand in others as \"bird.\" Even in these passages, as the reader will\nhave noticed, no marks of appreciation are employed, and we hear\nnothing of the sweetness, joyousness, or mournfulness of the bird's\nsong.\n\n\nWe will now proceed to the words which have been translated as Swallow\nin the Authorized Version.\n\nThese are two in number, namely, _der\u00f4r_ and _agar_. Hebraists are,\nhowever, agreed that the latter word has been wrongly applied, the\ntranslators having interchanged the signification of two contiguous\nwords.\n\nWe will therefore first take the word _deror_. This word signifies\nliberty, and is well applied to the Swallow, the bird of freedom. It\nis remarkable, by the way, how some of the old commentators have\ncontrived to perplex themselves about a very simple matter. One of\nthem comments upon the bird as being \"so called, because it has the\nliberty of building in the houses of mankind.\" Another takes a\nsomewhat similar view of the case, but puts it in a catechetical\nform: \"Why is the swallow called the bird of liberty? Because it lives\nboth in the house and in the field.\" It is scarcely necessary to point\nout to the reader that the \"liberty\" to which allusion is made is the\nliberty of flight, the bird coming and going at its appointed times,\nand not being capable of domestication.\n\nSeveral kinds of Swallow are known in Palestine, including the true\nSwallows, the martins, and the swifts, and, as we shall presently see,\nit is likely that one of these groups was distinguished by a separate\nname. Whether of not the word _deror_ included other birds beside the\nSwallows is rather doubtful, though not at all unlikely; and if so, it\nis probable that any swift-winged insectivorous bird would be called\nby the name of Deror, irrespective of its size or colour.\n\nThe bee-eaters, for example, are probably among the number of the\nbirds grouped together under the word _deror_, and we may conjecture\nthat the same is the case with the sunbirds, those bright-plumed\nlittle beings that take in the Old World the place occupied by the\nhumming-birds in the New, and often mistaken for them by travellers\nwho are not acquainted with ornithology. One of these birds, the\n_Nectarinia Ose\u00e6_, is described by Mr. Tristram as \"a tiny little\ncreature of gorgeous plumage, rivalling the humming-birds of America\nin the metallic lustre of its feathers--green and purple, with\nbrilliant red and orange plumes under its shoulders.\"\n\nIn order to account for the singular variety of animal life which is\nto be found in Palestine, and especially the exceeding diversity of\nspecies among the birds, we must remember that Palestine is a sort of\nmicrocosm in itself, comprising within its narrow boundaries the most\nopposite conditions of temperature, climate, and soil. Some parts are\nrocky, barren, and mountainous, chilly and cold at the top, and acting\nas channels through which the winds blow almost continuously. The\ncliffs are full of holes, rifts, and caverns, some natural, some\nartificial, and some of a mixed kind, the original caverns having been\nenlarged and improved by the hand of man.\n\nAs a contrast to this rough and ragged region, there lie close at hand\nlarge fertile plains, affording pasturage for unnumbered cattle, and\nof a tolerably equable temperature, so that the animals which are\npastured in it can find food throughout the year. Through the centre\nof Palestine runs the Jordan, fertilizing its banks with perpetual\nverdure, and ending its course in the sulphurous and bituminous waters\nof the Dead Sea, under whose waves the ruins of the wicked cities are\nsupposed to lie. Westward we have the shore of the Mediterranean with\nits tideless waves of the salt sea, and on the eastward of the\nmountain range that runs nearly parallel to the sea is the great Lake\nof Tiberias, so large as to have earned the name of the Sea of\nGalilee.\n\n [Illustration: THE RUFOUS SWALLOW AND GALILEAN SWIFT.\n\n \"_The turtle, and the crane, and the swallow observe the time of their\n coming._\"--JER. viii. 7.]\n\nUnder these favourable conditions, therefore, the number of species\nwhich are found in Palestine is perhaps greater than can be seen in\nany other part of the earth of the same dimensions, and it seems\nprobable that for this reason, among many others, Palestine was\nselected to be the Holy Land. If, for example, the Christian Church\nhad been originated under the tropics, those who lived in a cold\nclimate could scarcely have understood the language in which the\nScriptures must necessarily have been couched. Had it, on the\ncontrary, taken its rise in the Arctic regions, the inhabitants of the\ntropics and temperate regions could not have comprehended the imagery\nin which the teachings of Scripture must have been conveyed. But the\nsmall and geographically insignificant Land of Palestine combines in\nitself many of the characteristics which belong respectively to the\ncold, the temperate, and the hot regions of the world, so that the\nterms in which the sacred writings are couched are intelligible to a\nvery great proportion of the world's inhabitants.\n\nThis being the case, we naturally expect to find that several species\nof the Swallow are inhabitants of Palestine, if indeed so migratory a\nbird can be rightly said to be an inhabitant of any one country.\n\nThe chief characteristic of the Swallow, the \"bird of freedom,\" is\nthat it cannot endure captivity, but is forced by instinct to pass\nfrom one country to another for the purpose of preserving itself in a\ntolerably equable temperature, moving northwards as the spring ripens\ninto summer, and southwards as autumn begins to sink into winter. By\nsome marvellous instinct it traces its way over vast distances,\npassing over hundreds of miles where nothing but the sea is beneath\nit, and yet at the appointed season returning with unerring certainty\nto the spot where it was hatched. How it is guided no one knows, but\nthe fact is certain, that Swallows, remarkable for some peculiarity by\nwhich they could be at once identified, have been observed to leave\nthe country on their migration, and to return in the following year to\nthe identical nest whence they started.\n\nThe habits of the Swallow are much the same in Palestine as they are\nin England. Its habit of making its nest among the habitations of\nmankind is mentioned in a well-known passage of the Psalms: \"The\nsparrow hath found an house, and the swallow a nest for herself, where\nshe may lay her young, even Thine altars, O Lord of Hosts, my King and\nmy God\" (Ps. lxxxiv. 3). The Swallow seems in all countries to have\nenjoyed the protection of man, and to have been suffered to build in\npeace under his roof. We find the same idea prevalent in the New World\nas well as the Old, and it is rather curious that the presence of the\nbird should so generally he thought to bring luck to a house.\n\nIn some parts of our country, a farmer would not dare to kill a\nSwallow or break down its nest, simply because he thinks that if he\ndid so his cows would fail to give their due supply of milk. The\nconnexion between the milking of a cow in the field and the\ndestruction of a Swallow's nest in the house is not very easy to see,\nbut nevertheless such is the belief. This idea ranks with that which\nasserts the robin and the wren to be the male and female of the same\nspecies, and to be under some special divine protection.\n\nWhatever may be the origin of this superstition, whether it be derived\nfrom some forgotten source, or whether it be the natural result of the\nconfiding nature of the bird, the Swallow enjoys at the present day\nthe protection of man, and builds freely in his houses, and even his\nplaces of worship. The heathen temples, the Mahometan mosques, and the\nChristian churches are alike inhabited by the Swallow, who seems to\nknow her security, and often places her nest where a child might reach\nit.\n\nThe bird does not, however, restrict itself to the habitations of man,\nthough it prefers them; and in those places where no houses are to be\nfound, and yet where insects are plentiful, it takes possession of the\nclefts of rocks, and therein makes its nest. Many instances are known\nwhere the Swallow has chosen the most extraordinary places for its\nnest. It has been known to build year after year on the frame of a\npicture, between the handles of a pair of shears hung on the wall, on\na lamp-bracket, in a table-drawer, on a door-knocker, and similar\nstrange localities.\n\nThe swiftness of flight for which this bird is remarkable is noticed\nby the sacred writers. \"As the bird by wandering, as the swallow by\nflying, so the curse causeless shall not come\" (Prov. xxvi. 2). This\npassage is given rather differently in the Jewish Bible, though the\ngeneral sense remains the same: \"As the bird is ready to flee, as the\nswallow to fly away; so a causeless execration, it shall not come.\" It\nis possible, however, that this passage may allude rather to the\nmigration than the swiftness of the bird.\n\nSeveral species of Swallow inhabit the Holy Land. There is, for\nexample, our common SWALLOW, which is one of the migratory species,\nwhile another, the Oriental Swallow (_Hirundo cahirica_), often\nremains in the warmer parts of the country throughout the year. This\nbird may be distinguished by the chestnut hue of the under parts.\n\nPerhaps the most characteristic species is the RUFOUS or RUSSET\nSWALLOW (_Hirundo rufula_), a bird which is exceedingly rare even in\nthe warmer parts of Europe, but is plentiful in Palestine. It may be\neasily known by the chestnut red of the back just above the tail, in\nthe spot where the white patch occurs in our house martin. The under\nparts are differently coloured from those of the common Swallow, being\npink instead of white.\n\nSeveral Martins inhabit Palestine, among which are the two species\nwith which we are so familiar in England, namely, the HOUSE MARTIN\n(_Chelidon urbica_) and the SAND MARTIN (_Cotyle riparia_). At least\ntwo other species of Martin are known to inhabit the Holy Land, but\nthey do not call for any special notice.\n\n\nBesides the word _deror_, which is acknowledged to signify the\nSwallow, there is another word which, by a curious transposition, has\nbeen translated as \"crane,\" whereas there is little doubt that it\nsignifies one of the Swallow tribe, and most probably represents the\nSwift. The word is _sis_, and occurs in two passages. The first occurs\nin Isa. xxxviii. 13, 14, in the well-known prayer of Hezekiah during\nhis sickness: \"From day even to night wilt thou make an end of me.\nLike a crane [_sis_], or a swallow, so did I chatter: I did mourn as a\ndove: mine eyes fail with looking upward.\" The Jewish Bible reads the\nwords, \"Like a chattering swallow,\" affixing the mark of doubt; while\nthe Septuagint translates the word _sis_ as \"Chelidon,\" or Swallow,\nand this is probably the correct rendering of the word.\n\nAccepting this as the true interpretation, we find that the word _sis_\nis very expressive of the perpetual chattering of the Swift, whose\nsharp, shrill cries often betray its presence while it is sailing in\nthe air almost beyond the ken of human eyes. There is a wailing,\nmelancholy sound about the bird's cry which makes Hezekiah's image\nexceedingly appropriate, and he could hardly have selected a more\nforcible metaphor.\n\nThe second passage occurs in Jer. viii. 7: \"Yea, the stork in the\nheaven knoweth her appointed times; and the turtle, and the crane\n[_sis_], and the swallow observe the time of their coming; but my\npeople know not the judgment of the Lord.\" With regard to this\npassage, the Jewish Bible renders the word _sis_ as Swallow, though\nwith the mark of doubt.\n\nAllusion is here made to the migratory habits of the Swift. There is,\nperhaps, no bird more conspicuous in this respect; for whereas the\nother migratory birds seem to straggle, as it were, into the country,\nthe Swifts arrive almost simultaneously, so that on one day not a\nSwift will be seen, and on the next the air is full of their dark,\nglancing forms.\n\nLike the Swallow, the Swift haunts the neighbourhood of man, and loves\nto build its simple nest in the roofs of houses. Almost any hole will\ndo for a Swift to build in, provided that it be tolerably deep; for\nthe bird loves darkness for its nest, though it is essentially in its\nhabits a bird of light.\n\nPerhaps the word \"build\" is scarcely the right one, inasmuch as the\nnest is even more simple than that of the sand-martin. This latter\nbird does indeed arrange with some regularity the feathers which\ncompose its nest, as may be seen by a beautiful specimen obtained by\nMr. Gould; whereas the Swift merely places together a quantity of hay,\nstraw, hair, feathers, and similar materials, all of which are\nprobably obtained from the ruins of a sparrow's nest which had\noccupied the hole before the Swift took possession of it.\n\nSeveral species of Swift inhabit Palestine. The common Swift\n(_Cypselus apus_), with which we are so familiar, is very plentiful,\nand so is the ALPINE SWIFT (_Cypselus melba_), a bird which is rare in\nEngland, though it occasionally visits our shores. It is much larger\nthan the common Swift, and is brown above and white below, instead of\nbeing dusky black, like the common species.\n\nThe most characteristic species is, however, the GALILEAN SWIFT\n(_Cypselus affinis_). Of this kind, Mr. Tristram remarks that it is\n\"very like the house-martin in general appearance and size. It resides\nall the year in the Jordan valley, where alone it is found, living in\nlarge communities, and has a pleasing note, a gentle and melodious\nwail, very different from the harsh scream of the other swifts. Its\nnests are very peculiar, being composed generally of straw and\nfeathers, agglutinated together by the bird's saliva, like those of\nthe edible swallow of Eastern Asia. They are without any lining,\nattached to the under side of an overhanging rock. It also sometimes\ntakes possession of the nest of the rufus swallow for its purposes.\nThe Galilean swift has a wide range, being found in India and\nAbyssinia.\"\n\nIt is possible that this may be the Sis mentioned by Hezekiah, its\nsoft wailing cry being used as the metaphor to express his own\ncomplaining.\n\n\nAs might be expected, the Talmudical writers have much to say on this\nbird.\n\nFor example, the offering which a leper made at the cleansing of his\ninfirmity might be the Tzippor-deror, the rather quaint reason being\nthat it was a bird with sharp scratching claws, and was therefore very\nappropriately offered in connexion with a disease of the skin. Here we\nhave rather a complication of terms, the word _tzippor_ being used, as\nwe shall presently see, to signify the sparrow in particular, or any\nlittle bird in general. The particular species, therefore, which is\nsignified by the combination of the two words _tzippor-deror_ is\nrather obscure, and the Talmudists themselves are rather uncertain\nabout it. The interpretation of this compound word seems, however, to\nhave been a difficulty, and the various renderings which have been\nsuggested seem at last to have varied between the wild pigeon, or\nrock-dove, and the Swallow. An account of the various arguments is\ngiven by Lewysohn in his \"Zoologie des Talmuds,\" page 206, and may be\nbriefly epitomized, as follows, in favour of the Swallow, or, as we\nshall soon see, the Swift.\n\nThe reader may perhaps be acquainted with the legend respecting the\ndeath of Titus, how a gnat made its way through his nostril into his\nbrain, and there grew and kept him in constant torture until he died,\nwhen, according to some writers, it had reached the size of a\nTzippor-deror, and weighed two selaim. Others enlarged upon this\nstory, and said that it grew as large as a wild pigeon, and weighed\ntwo pounds. Now, as twenty-five selaim are equal to one pound, it\nfollows that the Tzippor-deror must have been very much less than the\nwild pigeon, and that therefore the two birds could not have been\nidentical.\n\nAnother reason for believing the Tzippor-deror to be a much smaller\nbird than the pigeon is found in a curious rule respecting the eating\nof certain meats. The Jews were forbidden to eat date-shells with the\nheathen, unless they were cooked in a vessel with an opening so small\nthat a Tzippor-deror could not have been introduced into the pot. The\nreason of this curious proviso was, that if any unclean flesh, such as\nthat of the swine, or of any animal which had been offered to idols,\nhad been cooked in that vessel, even the date-shells would become\nunclean. But, if the mouth of the pot were too small for a\nTzippor-deror to be passed through it, such a vessel could not have\nbeen used in cooking meat, and might therefore be assumed to be clean.\nHere, then, we have another proof of the small size of the bird. With\nregard to this argument, I find myself perplexed as to the\n\"date-shells.\" Dates have no shells, and need no cooking, while the\nstones are too hard and woody to be rendered edible by any amount of\ncooking. Still, the word employed by Lewysohn is \"dattelschalen.\"\n\nThe leper's offering was not laid on the altar, but was submitted to a\npeculiar manipulation on the part of the priest. Among other points of\nritual, the blood had to be mixed with a certain quantity of water,\nwhich it barely discoloured, staining it of a very pale red. As the\namount of water was the fourth part of a \"log,\" and is defined to be\nequal to the contents of six hen's eggs, it was evident that the bird\nwhose blood would only discolour so small a volume of water must be a\nlittle one.\n\nAfter giving all these details, the learned writer sums up his\narguments by saying that he believes the Tzippor-deror to be the White\nSwallow, which is small, and has claws so sharp that by means of them\nit can cling to the wall. Now this action is one of the\ncharacteristics of the Swifts, who often cling to walls for a time,\nand then resume their flight. They do so in preference to sitting on\nthe ground after the fashion of the Swallow, because the great length\nof the wings causes the Swift to find some little difficulty in rising\nfrom a level surface. After weighing all the various arguments that\nhave been urged on the subject, we may conclude that the Tzippor-deror\nwas the White, or Alpine Swift, which has been already described on\npage 389.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HOOPOE, OR LAPWING OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n The \"Dukiphath\" of Scripture--Various interpretations of the\n word--The Hoopoe--Its beauty and ill reputation--The unpleasant\n odour of its nest--Food of the Hoopoe--Its beautiful nest, and\n remarkable gestures--A curious legend of Solomon and the Hoopoe.\n\n\nIn the two parallel chapters, Lev. xi. and Deut. xiv., there occurs\nthe name of a bird which is translated in the Authorized Version,\nLapwing: \"And the stork, the heron after her kind, the lapwing, and\nthe bat.\"\n\nThe Hebrew word is _dukiphath_, and various interpretations have been\nproposed for it, some taking it to be the common domestic fowl, others\nthe cock-of-the-woods, or capercailzie, while others have preferred to\ntranslate it as Hoopoe. The Jewish Bible retains the word lapwing, but\nadds the mark of doubt. Commentators are, however, agreed that of all\nthese interpretations, that which renders the word as HOOPOE (_Upupa\nepops_) is the best.\n\nThere would be no particular object in the prohibition of such a bird\nas the lapwing, or any of its kin, while there would be very good\nreasons for the same injunction with regard to the Hoopoe.\n\nIn spite of the beauty of the bird, it has always had rather an ill\nreputation, and, whether in Europe or Asia, its presence seems to be\nregarded by the ignorant with a kind of superstitious aversion. This\nuniversal distaste for the Hoopoe is probably occasioned by an\nexceedingly pungent and disagreeable odour which fills the nest of the\nbird, and which infects for a considerable time the hand which is\nemployed to take the eggs.\n\nThe nest is, moreover, well calculated for retaining any unpleasant\nsmell, being generally made in the hollow of a tree, and having\ntherefore but little of that thorough ventilation which is found in\nnearly all nests which are built on boughs and sprays. The odour in\nquestion proceeds from a substance secreted from the tail-glands of\nthe Hoopoe, and is not due, as was long supposed, to the food which\nwas brought to the nest.\n\n [Illustration: THE HOOPOE.]\n\nThere was good reason for supposing that this evil odour was caused by\nthe food, inasmuch as the Hoopoe is in the habit of raking about in\nvery unsavoury places in search of insects. But it does not therefore\nfollow that the insects which it finds are possessed of an evil smell.\nOn the contrary, some of the worst-smelling insects--notably the\nlace-wing fly and many of the flower-haunting hemiptera--are\ninvariably found upon the leaves of trees and the petals of flowers;\nwhile others which, like many of the scarab beetles, haunt the most\nrepulsive substances, are in themselves bright, and clean, and sweet.\n\nThe food of the Hoopoe consists almost entirely of insects. They have\nbeen said to feed on earth-worms; but this notion seems to be a\nmistaken one, as in captivity they will not touch an earth-worm so\nlong as they can procure an insect. Beetles of various kinds seem to\nbe their favourite food, and when the beetles are tolerably\nlarge--say, for example, as large as the common cockchafer and\ndor-beetle--the bird beats them into a soft mass before it attempts to\neat them. Smaller beetles are swallowed without any ceremony. The\nvarious boring insects which make their home in decaying wood are\nfavourite articles of diet with the Hoopoe, which digs them out of the\nsoft wood with its long curved beak.\n\nIt has already been mentioned that the nest is usually made in the\nhollow of a tree. In many parts of the country however, hollow trees\ncannot be found, and in that case the Hoopoe resorts to clefts in the\nrock, or even to holes in old ruins.\n\nThe bird is a peculiarly conspicuous one, not only on account of its\nboldly-barred plumage and its beautiful crest, but by its cry and its\ngestures. It has a way of elevating and depressing its crest, and\nbobbing its head up and down, in a manner which could not fail to\nattract the attention even of the most incurious, the whole aspect and\nexpression of the bird varying with the raising and depressing of the\ncrest.\n\nRespecting this crest there is a curious old legend. As is the case\nwith most of the Oriental legends, it introduces the name of King\nSolomon, who, according to Oriental notions, was a mighty wizard\nrather than a wise king, and by means of his seal, on which was\nengraven the mystic symbol of Divinity, held sway over the birds, the\nbeasts, the elements, and even over the Jinns and Afreets, _i.e._ the\ngood and evil spirits, which are too ethereal for the material world\nand too gross for the spiritual, and therefore hold the middle place\nbetween them.\n\nOn one of his journeys across the desert, Solomon was perishing from\nthe heat of the sun, when the Hoopoes came to his aid, and flew in a\ndense mass over his head, thus forming a shelter from the fiery\nsunbeams. Grateful for this assistance, the monarch told the Hoopoes\nto ask for a boon, and it should be granted to them. The birds, after\nconsulting together, agreed to ask that from that time every Hoopoe\nshould wear a crown of gold like Solomon himself. The request was\nimmediately granted, and each Hoopoe found itself adorned with a\nroyal crown. At first, while their honours were new, great was the joy\nof the birds, who paused at every little puddle of water to\ncontemplate themselves, bowing their heads over the watery mirror so\nas to display the crown to the best advantage.\n\nSoon, however, they found cause to repent of their ambition. The\ngolden crown became heavy and wearisome to them, and, besides, the\nwealth bestowed on the birds rendered them the prey of every fowler.\nThe unfortunate Hoopoes were persecuted in all directions for the sake\nof their golden crowns, which they could neither take off nor conceal.\n\nAt last, the few survivors presented themselves before Solomon, and\nbegged him to rescind his fatal gift, which he did by substituting a\ncrest of feathers for the crown of gold. The Hoopoe, however, never\nforgets its former grandeur, and is always bowing and bending itself\nas it used to do when contemplating its golden crown in the water.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SPARROW.\n\n Signification of the word _Tzippor_--The bird used for the\n leper's sacrifice--The Sparrow upon the house-top--Architecture\n of the East--Proclamation from the house-tops--The Blue Thrush,\n its appearance and habits--Little birds exposed for sale in the\n market--The two Sparrows sold for a farthing--Bird-catching--The\n net, the snare, and the trap--The Sparrow that builds her nest\n in the Temple--The Tree-Sparrow--Various Sparrows that inhabit\n Palestine--Birds kept in cages.\n\n\nWe have already discussed the signification of the compound word\n_tzippor-deror_, and will now take the word _tzippor_ alone.\n\nLike many other Hebrew terms, the word is evidently used in a\ncollective sense, signifying any small bird that is not specially\ndesignated. In several portions of Scripture it is translated as\nSparrow, and to that word we will at present restrict ourselves.\n\nMuch difficulty has been found in identifying the bird which is\nsignified by this word, the various allusions not agreeing with each\nother. For example, in the marginal reading in Lev. xiv. 4 it is\nemployed as a bird of sacrifice. When a leper had found that his\ndisease had passed away, he was ordered to present himself before the\npriest, who would examine him, and decide whether the leprosy had\nreally passed away or not. If he found that the man was right, a\nseries of symbolic ceremonies had to be performed before the former\nleper could be restored to his place in the congregation.\n\nThese ceremonies lasted for eight days, and the first of them was the\nsacrificing of the Sparrow. \"Then shall the priest command to take for\nhim that shall be cleansed two birds [_tzipporim_ or sparrows] alive\nand clean, and cedar-wood, and scarlet, and hyssop.\" One of these\nbirds was to be sacrificed over running water, and the other to be set\nfree, this sacrifice being analogous to that of the scape-goat.\n\nWe see in this passage that the bird in question, whatever it might\nbe, must be one of those birds which were considered as clean and fit\nfor food. Indeed, the very use of the word \"clean\" shows that the\nleper was not restricted to any particular species. Had this been the\ncase, there would have been no necessity for stipulating that the\nTzipporim must belong to the list of _clean_ birds--_i.e._ those which\nwere permitted as food to the Israelites. Had any definite species\nbeen intended, there would have been no necessity for mentioning the\nword \"clean\" in connexion with the bird.\n\nIn the remaining ceremonies no such word is needed. There is no\nstipulation that the lamb to be sacrificed should be clean, or, in\ncase the leper should be a poor man, that the doves which he offers\nshould be clean. That the lamb should be without blemish is especially\nmentioned, because it would not be right to offer a maimed or diseased\nanimal--he who presented himself before the Lord might not offer a\nsacrifice which cost him nothing, and therefore was no true sacrifice.\nBut the lamb and the dove were known to be \"clean\" animals, so it was\nuseless to use the word in connexion with them. If, therefore, the\nwords \"clean birds\" (_tzipporim_) be mentioned, it is evident that the\nleper might select any of the Tzipporim, provided that it be one of\nthe species that was acknowledged to be dean.\n\nHere, then, we have an example that the Sparrow might be a bird of\nsacrifice. We will now pass to Ps. cii. 5-7, in which we find that the\nword is used as an emblem of solitude and misery: \"By reason of the\nvoice of my groaning, my bones cleave to my skin.\n\n\"I am like a pelican of the wilderness: I am like an owl of the\ndesert.\n\n\"I watch, and am as a sparrow alone upon the house-top.\"\n\nThe word which is here translated as \"Sparrow\" is _tzippor_, the same\nwhich is rendered as \"bird\" in Lev. xiv. 4. The Hebrew Bible more\nconsistently uses the collective term \"bird\" in both instances, and\nrenders the passage as, \"I watch, and am as a lonely bird upon a\nroof.\"\n\nNow, any one who knows the habits of the Sparrow is perfectly aware\nthat it is a peculiarly sociable bird. It is quarrelsome enough with\nits fellows, and always ready to fight for a stray grain or morsel of\nfood; but it is exceedingly gregarious, assembling together in little\nparties, enlivening the air with its merry though unmusical\ntwitterings.\n\nThis cosmopolitan bird is plentiful in the coast towns of Palestine,\nwhere it haunts the habitations of men with the same dauntless\nconfidence which it displays in England. It is often seen upon roofs\nor house-tops, but is no more apt to sit alone in Palestine than it is\nin England. On the contrary, the Sparrows collect in great numbers on\nthe house-tops, attracted by the abundant supply of food which it\nfinds there. This requires some little explanation.\n\nThe house-tops of the East, instead of being gabled and tiled as among\nourselves, to allow the rain to run off, are quite flat, and serve as\nterraces or promenades in the evening, or even for sleeping-places;\nand from the house-tops proclamations were made. See, for example, 1\nSam. ix. 25: \"And when they were come down from the high place into\nthe city, Samuel communed with Saul upon the top of the house\"--this\nbeing the ordinary place which would be chosen for a conversation. In\norder to keep out the heat of the mid-day sun, tents were sometimes\npitched upon these flat house-tops. (See 2 Sam. xvi. 22.) Reference to\nthe use of the house-tops as places for conversation are made in the\nNew Testament. See, for example, Matt. x. 27: \"What I tell you in\ndarkness, that speak ye in light; and what ye hear in the ear, that\npreach ye upon the house-tops.\" Another passage of a similar nature\noccurs in Luke xii. 3: \"Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in\ndarkness shall be heard in the light, and that which ye have spoken in\nthe ear in closets shall be proclaimed on the house-tops.\"\n\nThese roofs, instead of being built with sloping rafters like those to\nwhich we are accustomed in this country, are made with great beams of\nwood laid horizontally, and crossed by planks, poles, and brushwood\npacked tightly together. As this roof would not keep out the rain, it\nis covered with a thick layer of clay mixed with straw, and beaten\ndown as hard as possible. This covering has constantly to be renewed,\nas, even in the best made roofs, the heavy rains are sure to wash away\nsome portion of the clay covering, which has to be patched up with a\nfresh supply of earth. A stone roller is generally kept on the roof of\neach house for the purpose of making a flat and even surface.\n\nThe earth which is used for this purpose is brought from the\nuncultivated ground, and is full of various seeds. As soon as the\nrains fall, these seeds spring up, and afford food to the Sparrows and\nother little birds, who assemble in thousands on the house-tops, and\nthen peck away just as they do in our own streets and farm-yards.\n\nIt is now evident that the \"sparrow alone and melancholy upon the\nhouse-tops\" cannot be the lively, gregarious Sparrow which assembles\nin such numbers on these favourite feeding-places. We must therefore\nlook for some other bird, and naturalists are now agreed that we may\naccept the BLUE THRUSH (_Petrocossyphus cyaneus_) as the particular\nTzippor, or small bird, which sits alone on the house-tops. The colour\nof this bird is a dark blue, whence it derives its popular name. Its\nhabits exactly correspond with the idea of solitude and melancholy.\nThe Blue Thrushes never assemble in flocks, and it is very rare to see\nmore than a pair together. It is fond of sitting on the tops of\nhouses, uttering its note, which, however agreeable to itself, is\nmonotonous and melancholy to a human ear.\n\nIn connexion with the passage already quoted, \"What ye hear in the\near, that preach ye upon the house-tops,\" I will take the opportunity\nof explaining the passage itself, which scarcely seems relevant to the\noccasion unless we understand its bearings. The context shows that our\nLord was speaking of the new doctrines which He had come to teach,\nand the duty of spreading them, and alludes to a mode of religious\nteaching which was then in vogue.\n\n [Illustration: THE BLUE THRUSH, OR SPARROW OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_I am as a sparrow alone upon the house-tops._\"--PS. cii. 7.]\n\nThe long captivity of the Jews in Babylon had caused the Hebrew\nlanguage to be disused among the common people, who had learned the\nChaldaic language from their captors. After their return to Palestine,\nthe custom of publicly reading the Scriptures was found to be\npositively useless, the generality of the people being ignorant of the\nHebrew language.\n\nAccordingly, the following modification was adopted. The roll of the\nScriptures was brought out as usual, and the sacred words read, or\nrather chanted. After each passage was read, a doctor of the law\nwhispered its meaning into the ear of a Targumista or interpreter, who\nrepeated to the people in the Chaldaic language the explanation which\nthe doctor had whispered in Hebrew. The reader will now see how\nappropriate is the metaphor, the whispering in the ear and subsequent\nproclamation being the customary mode of imparting religious\ninstruction.\n\nIf the reader will now turn to Matt. x. 29, he will find that the word\n\"sparrow\" is used in a passage which has become very familiar to us.\n\"Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not\nfall on the ground without your Father.\n\n\"But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.\n\n\"Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.\" The\nsame sentences are given by St. Luke (xii. 6), in almost the same\nwords.\n\nNow the word which is translated as \"Sparrow\" is _strouthion_, a\ncollective word, signifying a bird of any kind. Without the addition\nof some epithet, it was generally used to signify any kind of small\nbird, though it is occasionally employed to signify even so large a\ncreature as an eagle, provided that the bird had been mentioned\nbeforehand. Conjoined with the word \"great,\" it signifies the ostrich;\nand when used in connexion with a word significative of running, it is\nemployed as a general term for all cursorial birds.\n\nIn the passages above quoted it is used alone, and evidently signifies\nany kind of little bird, whether it be a sparrow or not. Allusion is\nmade by our Lord to a custom, which has survived to the present day,\nof exposing for sale in the markets the bodies of little birds. They\nare stripped of their feathers, and spitted together in rows, just as\nare larks in this country, and always have a large sale. Various birds\nare sold in this manner, little if any distinction being made between\nthem, save perhaps in respect of size, the larger species commanding a\nhigher price than the small birds. In fact, they are arranged exactly\nafter the manner in which the Orientals sell their \"kabobs,\" _i.e._\nlittle pieces of meat pierced by wooden skewers.\n\nIt is evident that to supply such a market it is necessary that the\nbirds should be of a tolerably gregarious nature, so that a\nconsiderable number can be caught at a time. Nets were employed for\nthis purpose, and we may safely infer that the forms of the nets and\nthe methods of using them were identical with those which are employed\nin the same country at the present day.\n\nIt is rather curious that the mode of bird-catching which is familiar\nto us under the name of bat-fowling is employed in the East. The\nfowlers supply themselves with a large net supported on two sticks,\nand, taking a lantern with them fastened to the top of a pole, they\nsally out at night to the places where the small birds sleep.\n\nRaising the net on its sticks, they lift it to the requisite height,\nand hold the lantern exactly opposite to it, so as to place the net\nbetween the birds and the lantern. The roosting-places are then beaten\nwith sticks or pelted with stones, so as to awaken the sleeping birds.\nStartled by the sudden noise, they dash from their roosts,\ninstinctively make towards the light, and so fall into the net.\nBird-catching with nets is several times mentioned in the Old\nTestament, but in the New the net is only alluded to as used for\ntaking fish.\n\nBeside the net, several other modes of bird-catching were used by the\nancient Jews, just as is the case at the present day. Boys, for\nexample, who catch birds for their own consumption, and not for the\nmarket, can do so by means of various traps, most of which are made on\nthe principle of the noose, or snare. Sometimes a great number of\nhair-nooses are set in places to which the birds are decoyed, so that\nin hopping about many of them are sure to become entangled in the\nsnares. Sometimes the noose is ingeniously suspended in a narrow\npassage which the birds are likely to traverse, and sometimes a simple\nfall-trap is employed.\n\nTo these nooses many allusions are made in the Scriptures. See, for\nexample, Ps. cxxiv. 7: \"Our soul is escaped as a bird (_tzippor_) out\nof the snare of the fowlers: the snare is broken, and we are escaped.\"\nAlso Prov. vii. 23: \"He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to\nthe slaughter ... as a bird hasteneth to the snare, and knoweth not\nthat it is for his life.\" There is one passage in Ecclesiastes, where\nboth the fishing-net and the snare are mentioned in connexion with\neach other: \"For man knoweth not his time: as the fishes that are\ntaken in an evil net, and as the birds that are caught in the snare;\nso are the sons of men snared in an evil time, when it falleth\nsuddenly upon them\" (ix. 12).\n\nAllusion is also made to the snare by the prophet Amos in one of the\npassages where his rough, homely diction rises by successive steps\ninto sublimity: \"Can a bird fall in a snare upon the earth, where no\ngin is for him? shall one take up a snare from the earth, and have\ntaken nothing at all?\" (iii. 5.)\n\nSo common was the use of the snare that it was frequently used as a\nfamiliar image by the sacred writers. \"How long shall this man be a\nsnare to us?\" said Pharaoh's servants of Moses, through whom the\nwaters of the sacred river had been polluted, and various other\nplagues had come upon the Egyptians. Idols are called snares in many\nparts of the Scriptures, and so is the society of the wicked. A\nforcible use of this image was made by Saul when he found that his\ndaughter Michal loved David: \"And Saul said, I will give him her, that\nshe may be a snare to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be\nagainst him\" (1 Sam. xviii. 21). His device, or snare, not only\nfailed, but, as we learn in the succeeding chapter, verses 11-16,\nDavid was \"delivered from the snare of the fowler,\" by the very means\nwhich had been employed for entrapping him.\n\n\nWe now pass to another division of the subject. In Ps. lxxxiv. 1-3, we\ncome upon a passage in which the Sparrow is again mentioned: \"How\namiable are Thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts!\n\n\"My soul longeth, yea, even fainteth for the courts of the Lord; my\nheart and my flesh crieth out for the living God.\n\n\"Yea, the sparrow hath found an house, and the swallow a nest for\nherself, where she may lay her young, even Thine altars, O Lord of\nhosts, my King, and my God.\"\n\nIt is evident that we have in this passage a different bird from the\nSparrow that sitteth alone upon the house-tops; and though the same\nword, _tzippor_, is used in both cases, it is clear that whereas the\nformer bird was mentioned as an emblem of sorrow, solitude, and\nsadness, the latter is brought forward as an image of joy and\nhappiness. \"Blessed are they,\" proceeds the Psalmist, \"that dwell in\nThy house: they will be still praising Thee.... For a day in Thy\ncourts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the\nhouse of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.\"\n\nAccording to Mr. Tristram, this is probably one of the species to\nwhich allusion is made by the Psalmist. While inspecting the ruins in\nthe neighbourhood of the Temple, he came upon an old wall. \"Near this\ngate I climbed on to the top of the wall, and walked along for some\ntime, enjoying the fine view at the gorge of the Kedron, with its\nharvest crop of little white tombs. In a chink I discovered a\nsparrow's nest (_Passer cisalpinus_, var.) of a species so closely\nallied to our own that it is difficult to distinguish it, one of the\nvery kind of which the Psalmist sung.... The swallows had departed for\nthe winter, but the sparrow has remained pertinaciously through all\nthe sieges and changes of Jerusalem.\"\n\n [Illustration: THE TREE-SPARROW, OR SPARROW OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_Yea, the sparrow hath found an house, where she may lay her\n young._\"--PS. lxxxiv. 3.]\n\nThe same traveller thinks that the TREE SPARROW (_Passer montanus_)\nmay be the species to which the sacred writer refers, as it is even\nnow very plentiful about the neighbourhood of the Temple. In all\nprobability we may accept both these birds as representatives of the\nSparrow which found a home in the Temple. The swallow is separately\nmentioned, possibly because its migratory habits rendered it a\npeculiarly conspicuous bird; but it is probable that many species of\nbirds might make their nests in a place where they felt themselves\nsecure from disturbance, and that all these birds would be mentioned\nunder the collective and convenient term of Tzipporim.\n\nAs we are engaged upon the word Sparrow, it may be mentioned that\nseveral species of Sparrow inhabit Palestine. There is, for example,\nthe common House Sparrow, with which we are so familiar. Then, as has\njust been described, there is the Tree Sparrow--a bird which is very\ncommon in some parts of England, and never seen in others.\n\nBeside these, there is the MARSH SPARROW, or SPANISH SPARROW (_Passer\nsalicarius_), which haunts the banks of the Jordan, and is found there\nin countless myriads. Mr. Tristram mentions that it builds so\nplentifully in the thorn-bushes of the Jordan valley, that he has seen\nthe branches borne down by the weight of the nests. The same writer,\nin remarking upon the difficulty, not to say impossibility, of\ndefining the precise bird which was signified by a Hebrew word, says\nthat, exclusive of the crow tribe, the swifts, cuckoos, rollers,\nkingfishers, &c., nearly one hundred and fifty species of passerine\nbirds are known to inhabit the Holy Land, any or all of which may be\nsignified by the word _tzippor_.\n\nIn curious contrast to the generally unobservant nature of the\nOriental, and to the almost entire absence in Scripture of any\nallusion to the song of birds, we find that not only do the Orientals\nof the present day keep singing-birds in cages, but that the custom\nwas in all probability prevalent during the days when the various\nScriptural books were written. Any of my readers who are familiar--as\nthey ought to be--with that store-house of Oriental manners, the\n\"Arabian Nights,\" will remember several allusions to birds kept in\ncages, some for their song, some for their beauty of plumage, and some\nfor their powers of talking. The same custom is continued at the\npresent day; and not only in Palestine, but in other Eastern\ncountries, birds may be seen in cages hung outside the houses.\n\nIn two passages of the Scriptures the word \"cage\" is mentioned, but in\none case the word evidently has another meaning, and in the other the\nsignification is open to doubt.\n\nThe first of these passages occurs in Jer. v. 27: \"For among my people\nare found wicked men: they lay wait, as he that setteth snares; they\nset a trap, they catch men.\n\n\"As a cage is full of birds, so are their houses full of deceit.\"\n\nThere is but little doubt that the word which is rendered here as\n\"cage\" really signifies a trap, probably one of the basket-traps which\nare still employed in the East in bird-catching. One marginal reading\ngives the word as \"coop.\" The whole of the context, however, shows\nthat reference is made, not to keeping birds in cages, but to\ncapturing them in traps, to which the houses of the wicked are\ncompared.\n\nThe second mention of the word \"cage\" occurs in the Revelation, where\nthe sacred writer compares Babylon with \"a cage of every unclean\nbird.\" The word in this case signifies \"prison,\" and we cannot\ndefinitely say that it represents a cage such as we understand by the\nword. There is, however, a passage in the Book of Job (xli. 5) which\nunmistakeably alludes to the custom of domesticating birds. Speaking\nof the leviathan and its strength, the sacred writer uses the\nfollowing metaphor:--\"Wilt thou play with him as with a bird, or wilt\nthou bind him for thy maidens?\"\n\n\n\n\nTHE CUCKOO.\n\n The Cuckoo only twice mentioned in Scripture--Difficulty of\n identifying the Shachaph--The common species, and the Great\n Spotted Cuckoo--Depositing the egg--Conjectures respecting the\n Shachaph--Etymology of the word--The various gulls, and other\n sea-birds.\n\n\nOnly in two instances is the word CUCKOO found in the Authorized\nVersion of the Bible, and as they occur in parallel passages they are\npractically reduced to one. In Lev. xi. 16 we find it mentioned among\nthe birds that might not be eaten, and the same prohibition is\nrepeated in Deut. xiv. 15, the Jews being ordered to hold the bird in\nabomination.\n\nThe Hebrew word is _shachaph_ (the vowels to be pronounced as in\n\"mat\"), but as to the precise bird which is signified we can but\nconjecture. The etymology of the word gives us but little assistance.\n_Shachaph_ is derived from a root that signifies leanness or\nslenderness; but it is not very easy to base an interpretation on such\ngrounds. In the Jewish Bible the word is rendered as \"Cuckoo,\" but\nwith the addition of the doubtful mark.\n\nIt is possible that the bird may be the Shachaph of the Pentateuch,\nfor several species of Cuckoo are known to inhabit the Holy Land. One\nof them is the species with which we are so familiar in this country\nby sound, if not by sight, and which possesses in Palestine the same\nhabits as in England. It is rather remarkable, by the way, that the\nArabic name for the bird is exactly the same as ours, the peculiar cry\nhaving supplied the name. Its habit of laying its eggs in the nests of\nother birds is well known, together with the curious fact, that\nalthough so large a bird, measuring more than a foot in length, its\negg is not larger than that of the little birds, such as the\nhedge-sparrow, robin, or redstart.\n\n [Illustration: THE GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOO.\n\n \"_And the owl, and the night-hawk, and the cuckoo, and the hawk after\n his kind._\"--LEV. xi. 16; DEUT. xiv. 15.]\n\nBesides this species, another Cuckoo inhabits Palestine, and is much\nmore common. This is the GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOO (_Oxylophus\nglandarius_). The birds belonging to this genus have been separated\nfrom the other Cuckoos because the feathers on the head are formed\ninto a bold crest, in some species, such as Le Vaillant's Cuckoo,\nreminding the observer of the crest of the cockatoo. This fine bird\nmeasures nearly sixteen inches in length, and can be distinguished,\nnot only by the crested head, but by the reddish grey of the throat\nand chest, and the white tips of the wing and tail feathers.\n\nThis species lays its eggs in the nests of comparatively large birds,\nsuch as the rooks, crows, and magpies; and it is a remarkable fact,\nthat just as the egg of the English Cuckoo is very small, so as to\nsuit the nests of the little birds in which it is placed, that of the\nGreat Spotted Cuckoo is as large as the average rook's egg, so as to\nbe in proportion to the nests of the larger birds.\n\n\nMany commentators believe that by the word _shachaph_ was signified\nsome species of sea-gull, or at all events some marine bird. As such\nbirds live on fish, they would necessarily come into the class of\nunclean birds, and there is on that account some probability that the\nsuggestion is a correct one.\n\nDr. Lewysohn has a very elaborate disquisition on the subject, in\nwhich he decides that the creature was one of the sea-birds, and\nderives its name of Shachaph, or \"attenuated,\" from the meagreness of\nits proportions. Of the various sea-birds, he selects the petrel as\nthe species which he thinks to have been signified by the word. This\nbird, as he says, is a very lean one, having many feathers, but very\nlittle flesh, so that its limbs are no larger than olives, and no one\ncould make a meal of it. This last remark, however, tends to diminish\nrather than to establish his theory, as, if the bird could not be\neaten, there would have been no object in prohibiting the Jews from\neating it.\n\nHe further proceeds to observe that the bird is unable to scratch, and\nmay therefore be given to a child as a playfellow, and that it is\ncapable of being domesticated and living in a cage. There is, however,\nno argument here, and the theory is not a tenable one.\n\nMr. Tristram, with far more probability, suggests that if the bird be\nnot one of the Cuckoos, and be really a sea-bird, it may be one of the\nshearwaters which live in such numbers on the sea-shore of Palestine.\nHe mentions especially two species, the Great Shearwater (_Puffinus\ncinereus_) and the Manx Shearwater (_Puffinus anglorum_), both of\nwhich are extremely plentiful on the coast, skimming continually over\nthe water, and being at the present day regarded by the Mahometans\nwith superstitious awe, being thought to be the ever-restless souls of\nthe condemned, who are doomed to fly backwards and forwards\ncontinually until the end of the world, clad in sombre plumage, and\nnever permitted to rest.\n\nBesides the shearwater, many species of gull inhabit the same coast,\nand it is not at all unlikely that the word _shachaph_ was used in a\ncollective sense, as we have seen to be the case with _tzippor_, and\nsignified any of the marine birds, without aiming at distinction of\nspecies.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DOVE.\n\n Parallel between the lamb and the Dove--Derivation of the Hebrew\n word _Yon\u00e2h_--The Dove and the olive branch--Abram's sacrifice,\n and its acceptance--The sacrifice according to the law of\n Moses--The Dove-sellers of the Temple--Talmudical zoology--The\n story of Ilisch--The Dove and the raven--The Dove a type of\n Israel--The Beni-yon\u00e2h, or Sons of Pigeons--Home-finding\n instinct of the pigeon--The Oriental Dove-cotes--Voice of the\n Dove--Its strength of wing--The Dove's dung of Samaria--Various\n pigeons of Palestine--The Rock-Dove and its multitudes--The Dove\n and the Griffon--The Turtle-Doves of Palestine, and their\n appearance and habits.\n\n\nIn giving the Scriptural history of the Doves and Pigeons, we shall\nfind ourselves rather perplexed in compressing the needful information\ninto a reasonable space. There is no bird which plays a more important\npart, both in the Old and the New Testaments, or which is employed so\nlargely in metaphor and symbol.\n\nThe Doves and Pigeons were to the birds what were the sheep and lambs\nto the animals, and, like them, derived their chief interest from\ntheir use in sacrifice. Both the lamb and the young pigeon being\nemblems of innocence, both were used on similar occasions, the latter\nbeing in many instances permitted when the former were too expensive\nfor the means of the offerer. As to the rendering of the Hebrew words\nwhich have been translated as Pigeon, Dove, and Turtle Dove, there has\nnever been any discussion. The Hebrew word _yon\u00e2h_ has always been\nacknowledged to signify the Dove or Pigeon, and the word _t\u00f4r_ to\nsignify the Turtle Dove. Generally, the two words are used in\ncombination, so that _tor-yon\u00e2h_ signifies the Turtle Dove.\n\nThough the interpretation of the word _yon\u00e2h_ is universally accepted,\nthere is a little difficulty about its derivation, and its\nsignification apart from the bird. Some have thought that it is\nderived from a root signifying warmth, in allusion to the warmth of\nits affection, the Dove having from time immemorial been selected as\nthe type of conjugal love. Others, among whom is Buxtorf, derive it\nfrom a word which signifies oppression, because the gentle nature of\nthe Dove, together with its inability to defend itself, cause it to be\noppressed, not only by man, but by many rapacious birds.\n\n\nThe first passage in which we hear of the Dove occurs in the earlier\npart of Genesis. Indeed, the Dove and the raven are the first two\ncreatures that are mentioned by any definite names, the word\n_nachosh_, which is translated as \"serpent\" in Gen. iii. 1, being a\ncollective word signifying any kind of serpent, whether venomous or\notherwise, and not used for the purpose of designating any particular\nspecies.\n\nTurning to Gen. viii. 8, we come to the first mention of the Dove. The\nwhole passage is too familiar to need quoting, and it is only needful\nto say that the Dove was sent out of the ark in order that Noah might\nlearn whether the floods had subsided, and that, after she had\nreturned once, he sent her out again seven days afterwards, and that\nshe returned, bearing an olive-branch (or leaf, in the Jewish Bible).\nSeven days afterwards he sent the Dove for the third time, but she had\nfound rest on the earth, and returned no more.\n\nIt is not within the province of this work to treat, except in the\nmost superficial manner, of the metaphorical signification of the\nScriptures. I shall, therefore, allude but very slightly to the\nmetaphorical sense of the passages which record the exit from the ark\nand the sacrifice of Noah. Suffice it to say that, putting entirely\naside all metaphor, the characters of the raven and the Dove are well\ncontrasted. The one went out, and, though the trees were at that time\nsubmerged, it trusted in its strong wings, and hovered above the\nwatery expanse until the flood had subsided. The Dove, on the\ncontrary, fond of the society of man, and having none of the wild,\npredatorial habits which distinguish the raven, twice returned to its\nplace of refuge, before it was finally able to find a resting-place\nfor its foot.\n\nAfter this, we hear nothing of the Dove until the time of Abraham,\nsome four hundred years afterwards, when the covenant was made between\nthe Lord and Abram, when \"he believed in the Lord, and it was counted\nto him for righteousness.\" In order to ratify this covenant he was\nordered to offer a sacrifice, which consisted of a young heifer, a\nshe-goat, a ram, a turtle-dove, and a young dove or pigeon. The larger\nanimals were severed in two, but the birds were not divided, and\nbetween the portions of the sacrifice there passed a lamp of fire as a\nsymbol of the Divine presence.\n\nIn after days, when the promise that the seed of Abram should be as\nthe stars of heaven for multitude had been amply fulfilled, together\nwith the prophecy that they should be \"strangers in a land that was\nnot theirs,\" and should be in slavery and under oppression for many\nyears, the Dove was specially mentioned in the new law as one of the\ncreatures that were to be sacrificed on certain defined occasions.\n\nEven the particular mode of offering the Dove was strictly defined.\nSee Lev. i. 14-17: \"If the burnt sacrifice for his offering to the\nLord be of fowls, then he shall bring his offering of turtle-doves, or\nof young pigeons.\n\n\"And the priest shall bring it unto the altar, and wring off his head,\nand burn it on the altar; and the blood thereof shall be wrung out at\nthe side of the altar.\n\n\"And he shall pluck away his crop with his feathers, and cast it\nbeside the altar, on the east part, by the place of the ashes.\n\n\"And he shall cleave it with the wings thereof, but shall not divide\nit asunder: and the priest shall burn it upon the altar, upon the wood\nthat is upon the fire.\"\n\nHere we have a repetition not only of the sacrifice of Abram, but of\nthe mode in which it was offered, care being taken that the body of\nthe bird should not be divided. There is a slight, though not very\nimportant variation in one or two portions of this passage. For\nexample, the wringing off the head of the bird is, literally, pinching\noff, and had to be done with the thumb nail; and the passage which is\nby some translators rendered as the crop and the feathers, is by\nothers translated as the crop and its contents--a reading which seems\nto be more consonant with the usual ceremonial of sacrifice than the\nother.\n\nAs a general rule, the pigeon was only sanctioned as a sacrificial\nanimal in case one of more value could not be afforded; and so much\ncare was taken in this respect, that with the exception of the two\n\"sparrows\" (_tzipporim_) that were enjoined as part of the sacrifice\nby which the cleansed leper was received back among the people (Lev.\nxiv. 4), no bird might be offered in sacrifice unless it belonged to\nthe tribe of pigeons.\n\nIt was in consequence of the poverty of the family that the Virgin\nMary brought two young pigeons when she came to present her new-born\nSon in the Temple. For those who were able to afford it, the required\nsacrifice was a lamb of the first year for a burnt-offering, and a\nyoung pigeon or Turtle Dove for a sin-offering. But \"if she be not\nable to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young\npigeons, the one for the burnt-offering and the other for a\nsin-offering.\" The extraordinary value which all Israelites set upon\nthe first-born son is well known, both parents even changing their own\nnames, and being called respectively the father and mother of Elias,\nor Joseph, as the case may be. If the parents who had thus attained\nthe summit of their wishes possessed a lamb, or could have obtained\none, they would most certainly have offered it in the fulness of their\njoy, particularly when, as in the case of Mary, there was such cause\nfor rejoicing; and the fact that they were forced to substitute a\nsecond pigeon for the lamb is a proof of their extreme poverty.\n\nWhile the Israelites were comparatively a small and compact nation,\ndwelling around their tabernacle, the worshippers could easily offer\ntheir sacrifices, bringing them from their homes to the altar. But in\nprocess of time, when the nation had become a large and scattered one,\nits members residing at great distances, and only coming to the Temple\nonce or twice in the year to offer their sacrifices, they would have\nfound that for even the poor to carry their pigeons with them would\nhave greatly increased the trouble, and in many cases have been almost\nimpossible.\n\nFor the sake of convenience, therefore, a number of dealers\nestablished themselves in the outer courts of the Temple, for the\npurpose of selling Doves to those who came to sacrifice. Sheep and\noxen were also sold for the same purpose, and, as offerings of money\ncould only be made in the Jewish coinage, money-changers established\nthemselves for the purpose of exchanging foreign money brought from a\ndistance for the legal Jewish shekel. That these people exceeded their\nobject, and endeavoured to overreach the foreign Jews who were\nignorant of the comparative value of money and goods, is evident from\nthe fact of their expulsion by our Lord, and the epithets which were\napplied to them.\n\nAs the Dove played so important a part in the Jewish worship, the\nTalmudical writers have investigated the subject with a curious\nminuteness.\n\nIn the first place, they discuss the reasons for its selection as the\nbird of sacrifice, and always endeavour to represent it as contrasted\nwith the raven--all birds of the raven kind, _i.e._ the rooks, crows,\nmagpies, and the like, being set down as cunning, deceptive, and\nthieving; while all the pigeon kind are mild, true, and loving. There\nis a curious story which illustrates this idea. A certain man named\nIlisch, who understood the language of birds, was \"once upon a time\"\nin captivity, when he heard the cry of a raven, which called out to\nhim, \"Ilisch! Ilisch! flee! flee!\" But Ilisch said within himself, \"I\nbelieve not this lying bird.\" But next came a Dove, which said the\nsame words. Then said Ilisch, \"I believe this bird, because Israel is\ncompared to a dove.\"\n\nHere this Ilisch, whoever he may be, referred to the Talmudical\nwriters on the subject of the Dove, which they delighted to compare\nwith Israel in a variety of ways, some of them being very obscure and\nrather far-fetched. For example, of all birds the Dove is the most\npersecuted, being gentle, meek, and unable to resist. She cannot fight\nwith her beak or her claws, and has only her wings, with which she\nwill flee away if she is able, or if not, will fight with them. Now,\nas the wings are to the Dove, so is the law to Israel.\n\nThe wings are the strength of the Dove. Upheld by them she can fly for\nmany hours, so that the birds of prey which are pursuing her cannot\ntake her. Then comes a strange notion of the Dove's flight. When other\nbirds are tired, they sit down and fold their wings to rest. But the\ntired Dove never ceases her flight; but when one wing is fatigued,\nshe allows it to rest, and continues her flight with the other. So is\nit with Israel, who, though persecuted by the Gentiles, and deprived\nof half her strength, cannot be entirely crushed, but still survives\nand asserts herself.\n\nOne reason that is given for the gentle disposition of the Dove is\nthat the bird has no gall, the gall being considered by the\nnaturalists of old as the source and fountain of contention, the\nbitterness of the gall being supposed to infuse itself into the\nspirit. Probably on account of this anatomical peculiarity, the Dove\nwas considered as the very pattern for married people, and the emblem\nof chastity, as it lives in the strictest monogamy, never desiring\nanother mate. Unfortunately for these writers, the Raven, which is\nalways mentioned by them in strong contrast with the Dove, is quite as\nremarkable for its attachment to its mate and young, and for the\nstrictness of its monogamy, the same pair, when once mated, residing\ntogether for the whole of their lives.\n\nEven the age of the Dove was made a matter of consideration by the\nTalmudists, so that in great measure the original benevolence of the\nLaw was cramped by the restrictions which were laid upon it. As we are\ntold by St. Paul, in Heb. ix., even under the old dispensation,\nwithout shedding of blood there was no remission of sins, and he who\ndesired to obtain that remission was obliged to shed the blood of the\nsacrifice. Now, in order that poverty should be no restriction to the\nattainment of the greatest spiritual privileges, it was ordained that\nyoung pigeons or Turtle Doves might be substituted for the more costly\nanimals.\n\nThese birds cost but very little. The peasant might take them from the\ndove-cote, which was the appendage of most households, and he who was\ntoo poor even to have a dove-cote of his own might go to the rocky\nside of the ravines, and take as many young as he pleased from the\nmyriad nests which are placed in the clefts. Thus, at any time of the\nyear, the poorest man or woman could obtain the means of sacrifice.\n\nBut the restrictive genius which was so sternly rebuked by our Lord\nsoon made itself felt. All these birds, in order to be fit for\nsacrifice, must be Beni-yon\u00e2h, _i.e._ Sons of Doves. The definition of\nthis term is rather interesting, as it affords an excellent example of\nthe hair-splitting character of these interpreters of the Law.\nAccording to them, a pigeon could only be ranked among the Beni-yon\u00e2h\nfor a short period of its life, and, if it were too young or too old,\nit might not be offered as a sacrifice.\n\nThe test of proper age lay in the feathers. If the bird were so young\nthat the feathers could be pulled out without drawing blood, it was\nconsidered as being below age. If, on the contrary, blood followed the\nfeathers, but the plumage of the neck exhibited a metallic lustre, it\nwas reckoned as having passed the age of Beni-yon\u00e2h. It might be a\nfather, and not the son, of pigeons. When these feathers are visible,\nthe bird changes its name, and is called T\u00f4r--a word which will be\npresently explained.\n\nAccording to some of these old writers, the Dove was considered as\nhaving a superiority over other birds in the instinctive certainty\nwith which it finds its way from one place to another. At the present\ntime, our familiarity with the variety of pigeon known as the Carrier\nhas taught us that the eye is the real means employed by the pigeon\nfor the direction of its flight. Those who fly pigeons for long\ndistances always take them several times over the same ground,\ncarrying them to an increasing distance at every journey, so that the\nbirds shall be able to note certain objects which serve them as\nlandmarks.\n\nBees and wasps have recourse to a similar plan. When a young wasp\nleaves its nest for the first time, it does not fly away at once, but\nhovers in front of the entrance for some time, getting farther and\nfarther away from the nest until it has learned the aspect of\nsurrounding objects. The pigeon acts in precisely the same manner, and\nso completely does it depend upon eyesight that, if a heavy fog should\ncome on, the best-trained pigeon will lose its way.\n\nThe old writers, however, made up their minds that the pigeon found\nits way by scent, which sense alone, according to their ideas, could\nguide it across the sea. They were not aware of the power possessed by\nbirds of making their eyes telescopic at will, or of the enormous\nincrease of range which the sight obtains by elevation. A pigeon at\nthe elevation of several hundred yards can see to an astonishing\ndistance, and there is no need of imagining one sense to receive a\npeculiar development when the ordinary powers of another are\nsufficient to obtain the object.\n\nThat dove-cotes were in use among the earlier Jews is well known. An\nallusion to the custom of keeping pigeons in cotes is seen in Isa. lx.\n8: \"Who are these that fly as a cloud, and as the doves to their\nwindows?\" or, as the Jewish Bible translates the passage, \"as the\ndoves to their apertures?\" In this passage the sacred writer utters a\nprophecy concerning the coming of the world to the Messiah, the\nGentiles flocking to Him as the clouds of pigeons fly homeward to\ntheir cotes.\n\nThe practice of pigeon-keeping has survived to the present day, the\nhouses of wealthy men being furnished with separate pigeon-houses,\nbuilt up of a number of earthen jars, and roofed over. Each jar is the\nhabitation of a pair of pigeons, and the whole principle of this\ndove-cote is exactly the same as that which was employed by the late\nMr. Waterton in erecting the starling-houses in his garden and\ngrounds. Poorer people, who cannot afford to build a separate house\nfor the pigeons, set up jars for them in their own houses, the pigeons\ngaining access to their nests through the door.\n\nThe Talmudical writers have even their regulations respecting the\nkeeping of tame pigeons. No one was allowed to do so who had not a\nsufficiency of ground around his house to supply food for them.\nAccording to their regulations, the pigeon-house must not be within\nfifty paces of cultivated ground belonging to any one except the owner\nof the pigeons. The reason for this prohibition was, that as the\npigeon was known to be an exceedingly voracious bird, it should not\nfeed at the expense of a neighbour. It was conventionally supposed to\nfeed by choice in the immediate vicinity of the house, and, when it\nhad filled its crop, to be unwilling to fly farther than was\nabsolutely necessary.\n\nBeing so familiar with this bird, it was to be expected that the\nwriters of the Scriptures would make many references to it. The\nplaintive, monotonous cooing of the pigeon is several times mentioned.\nFor example: \"And Huzzab shall be led away captive, she shall be\nbrought up, and her maids shall lead her as with the voice of doves,\ntaboring upon their breasts\" (Nah. ii. 7). The Jewish Bible gives this\npassage in another and certainly a more forcible manner: \"And Huzzab\nshall be uncovered and brought up, and her maids shall sigh as the\nvoice of doves, drumming upon their breasts.\" Here the prophet alludes\nto the ancient custom of beating the breast as a sign of sorrow (a\ncustom that survived even in this country until a very recent date),\naccompanied with the moanings of distress.\n\nThe prophet Isaiah makes use of a similar metaphor: \"I did mourn as a\ndove: mine eyes fail with looking upward\" (xxxviii. 14). Also in chap.\nlix. 11: \"We roar all like bears, and mourn sore like doves.\"\n\n [Illustration: THE ROCK DOVE.\n\n \"O my dove, that art in the clefts of the rocks.\"--CANT. ii. 14.]\n\nThe beauty of the bird is mentioned in many passages, several of which\noccur in the Song of Solomon. \"Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold,\nthou art fair; thou hast dove's eyes\" (i. 15). \"His eyes are the eyes\nof doves by the rivers of waters, washed with milk, and fitly set\" (v.\n12). And in several other places the beloved is spoken of as a Dove,\nas in the following passage: \"My dove, my undefiled, is but one; she\nis the only one of her mother, she is the choice one of her that bare\nher\" (vi. 9).\n\nAllusion is made to the peculiar metallic gleam of the Dove's plumage\nin a well-known passage of the Psalms: \"Though ye have lien among the\npots, yet shall ye be as the wings of a dove covered with silver, and\nher feathers with yellow gold\" (Ps. lxviii. 13).\n\nThe strong flight of the Dove is also mentioned by the Psalmist in an\nequally familiar passage: \"And I said, Oh that I had wings like a\ndove! for then would I fly away, and be at rest. Lo, then would I\nwander far off, and remain in the wilderness\" (Ps. lv. 6, 7). It is\nscarcely necessary to advert to the well-known passages in which\nreference is made to the gentleness of the Dove.\n\nThat the pigeons which are not domesticated live in the rocks was\nknown to the Scripture writers, who make several references to the\nfact.\n\nSee, for example: \"O ye that dwell in Moab, leave the cities, and\ndwell in the rock, and be like the dove that maketh her nest in the\nsides of the hole's mouth\" (Jer. xlviii. 28). See also Ezek. vii. 16:\n\"But they that escape of them shall escape, and shall be on the\nmountains like doves of the valleys, all of them mourning, every one\nfor his iniquity.\"\n\nThis is an especially graphic image. The deep valleys that run between\nthe mountain ranges are literally crowded with pigeons who have made\ntheir nests in the cavities. Several of these are so well known that\nthey go by the name of \"Valleys of Pigeons.\"\n\nIn the Song of Solomon (ii. 14) is another reference to the\nrock-loving propensities of the Dove: \"O my dove, that art in the\nclefts of the rock, in the secret places of the stairs, let me see thy\ncountenance, let me hear thy voice.\" The Jewish Bible gives a slightly\ndifferent rendering, translating the word which is given as \"stairs\"\nin the Authorized Version as \"cliffs.\"\n\nThat the Doves were caught in nets is evident from a passage in Hosea\n(vii. 11, 12): \"Ephraim also is like a silly dove without heart: they\ncall to Egypt, they go to Assyria.\n\n\"When they shall go, I will spread my net upon them; I will bring them\ndown as the fowls of the heaven; I will chastise them, as their\ncongregation hath heard.\"\n\nThere is one passage in the Old Testament about which great\ncontroversy has taken place. It occurs in 2 Kings vi. 25. When\nBen-hadad besieged Samaria, and tried to reduce it by starvation, the\nfamine was so great in the city that \"an ass's head was sold for\nfourscore pieces of silver, and the fourth part of a cab of dove's\ndung for five pieces of silver.\"\n\nObjection has been taken to this passage on the score of the exceeding\nrepulsiveness of the food. This objection, however, cannot hold good;\nfor, although such diet must have been most repulsive, it could not\nhave been more so than the flesh of the ass, an animal which was\nstrictly forbidden as food, and held as unclean. Moreover, as we see\nin verse 29 that parents actually ate the flesh of their own children,\nit is evident that the mere repulsiveness of the food cannot be taken\nas an objection.\n\nA far stronger objection is to be found in the fact that even all the\ndove-cotes of Samaria could not furnish a sufficient quantity for\nfood, especially as the Doves themselves must have been killed and\neaten long before the people were driven to such an extremity as to\neat the flesh of their own children. It is far more probable that the\n\"dove's-dung\" was the name of a vegetable of some kind. We find a\nsimilar nomenclature in the popular names of many of our own plants,\nsuch as oxlip, cowslip, horse-tail, hart's-tongue, mouse-ear,\nmaidenhair, and the like.\n\n\nWe now come to the various species of Pigeons which inhabit Palestine.\n\nIn the Holy Land are found all the species of Pigeons which inhabit\nEngland, together with one or two others. First, there is the Rock\nPigeon, or Blue Rock Dove (_Columba livia_), which is acknowledged to\nbe the origin of our domestic breeds of Pigeons, with all their\ninfinite variety of colour and plumage. This species, though plentiful\nin Palestine, is not spread over the whole of the land, but lives\nchiefly on the coast and in the higher parts of the country. In these\nplaces it multiplies in amazing numbers, its increase being almost\nwholly unchecked by man, on account of the inaccessible cliffs in\nwhich it lays its eggs and nurtures its young, its only enemies being\na few of the birds and beasts of prey, which can exercise but a\ntrifling influence on these prolific birds.\n\nIn other parts of the country the Egyptian Rock Dove (_Columba\nSchimperi_) takes the place of the more northern species. It is a\nlittle smaller than our own Rock Dove, and has not the whitish plumage\non the lower part of the back. This species is quite as numerous as\nthe other, and builds in similar places. Mr. Tristram, while visiting\nthe Wady (or Valley) Seim\u00fbn, which lies near the Lake of Gennesaret,\nwitnessed an amusing example of the vast number of these Pigeons.\n\n\"No description can give an adequate idea of the myriads of rock\npigeons. In absolute clouds they dashed to and fro in the ravine,\nwhirling round with a rush and a whirr that could be felt like a gust\nof wind. It was amusing to watch them upset the dignity and the\nequilibrium of the majestic griffon as they swept past him. This\nenormous bird, quietly sailing along, was quite turned on his back by\nthe sudden rush of wings and wind.\"\n\nThe writer of this description has been too modest. It is impossible\nto convey a better idea of the vast multitude of birds than has been\ngiven by this anecdote. We are all familiar with the clatter of\nPigeons' wings as they dart from their resting-place, and can well\nimagine how great must have been the multitude of birds that would\nfairly turn the powerful griffon-vulture on its back. This description\nmay be advantageously compared with the passage in Isa. lx. 8: \"Who\nare these that fly as a cloud?\" the sacred writer well knowing the\nforce of his image when addressed to those who were familiar with the\nhabits of the bird, whether it was the semi-domesticated House Pigeon\nor the wild Rock Dove. The Ring Dove (_Columba palumbus_) and the\nStock Dove (_Columba \u00e6nas_) are also found in Palestine.\n\nThese birds are taken in nets, into which they are decoyed by a very\neffective though cruel device.\n\nWhen one of these birds is trapped or snared, it is seized by its\ncapturers, who spare its life for the sake of using it as a decoy.\nThey blind it by sewing its eyelids together, and then fasten it to a\nperch among trees. The miserable bird utters plaintive cries, and\ncontinually flaps its wings, thus attracting others of its kind, who\nsettle on the surrounding branches and are easily taken, their whole\nattention being occupied by the cries of their distressed companion.\n\nWe now come to the Turtle Doves, several of which inhabit the Holy\nLand; but, as they are similar in habits, we will confine ourselves to\nthe common species (_Turtur auritus_), with which we are so familiar\nin this country. The Hebrew word which is translated as Turtle, is\n_t\u00f4r_, a term which is usually employed in connexion with the word\n_y\u00f4n\u00e2h_, or Dove, thus, _t\u00f4r-y\u00f4n\u00e2h_. The name is evidently derived\nfrom the note of the bird.\n\nThe reader may remember that on page 414, a curious tradition has been\nmentioned respecting the word _t\u00f4r_; namely, that it represented the\nage, and not the species of a Dove. There is but little doubt,\nhowever, that the word really does represent a species, and that the\nTurtle Dove is the bird signified by the word _t\u00f4r_. For example, its\nmigratory habits are noticed in the sacred writings. See the following\npassage in the Song of Solomon.\n\n [Illustration: THE TURTLE DOVE.\n\n \"_The voice of the turtle is heard in our land._\"--CANT. ii. 12.]\n\n\"Lo, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone; the flowers appear\non the earth; the time of the singing of birds is come, and the voice\nof the turtle is heard in our land\" (Cant. ii. 11, 12). The prophet\nJeremiah also refers to the migration of this bird: \"Yea, the stork in\nthe heaven knoweth her appointed times; and the turtle, and the crane,\nand the swallow observe the time of their coming: but my people know\nnot the judgment of the Lord\" (viii. 7).\n\nBeside this species, there is the Collared Turtle Dove (_Turtur\nrisorius_), one variety of which is known in England as the Barbary\nDove. It is a large species, measuring more than a foot in length.\nAnother species is the Palm Turtle (_Turtur Senegalensis_), so called\nfrom its habit of nesting on palm-trees, when it is obliged to build\nat a distance from the habitations of man. It is a gregarious bird,\nseveral nests being generally found on one tree, and even, when it\ncannot find a palm, it will build among the thorns in multitudes. Like\nthe common Dove, it is fond of the society of man, and is sure to make\nits nest among human habitations, secure in its knowledge that it will\nnot be disturbed.\n\nIt is rather a small bird, being barely ten inches in length, and\nhaving no \"collar\" on the neck, like the two preceding species.\n\n\n\n\nPOULTRY.\n\n Poultry plentiful in Palestine at the present day--The Domestic\n Fowl unknown in the early times of Israel--The eating and\n gathering of eggs--References to Poultry in the New\n Testament--The egg and the scorpion--The fatted fowl of\n Solomon--The hen brooding over her eggs--Poultry prohibited\n within Jerusalem--The cock-crowing.\n\n\nAt the present day, poultry are plentiful both in Palestine and Syria,\nand that they were bred in the time of the Apostles is evident from\none or two references which are made by our Lord. How long the\nDomestic Fowl had been known to the Jews is extremely uncertain, and\nwe have very little to guide us in our search.\n\nThat it was unknown to the Jews during the earlier period of their\nhistory is evident from the utter silence of the Old Testament on the\nsubject. A bird so conspicuous and so plentiful would certainly have\nbeen mentioned in the Law of Moses had it been known to the\nIsraelites; but, in all its minute and detailed provisions, the Law is\nsilent on the subject.\n\nNeither the bird itself nor its eggs are mentioned, although there are\na few references to eggs, without signifying the bird which laid\nthem. The humane provision in Deut. xxii. 6, 7, refers not to a\ndomesticated, but to a wild bird: \"If a bird's nest chance to be\nbefore thee in any tree, or on the ground, whether they be young ones,\nor eggs, and the dams sitting upon the young, or upon the eggs, thou\nshalt not take the dam with the young: but thou shalt in any wise let\nthe dam go, and take the young to thee; that it may be well with thee,\nthat thou mayest prolong thy days.\"\n\nThat eggs were used for food, is seen from Job vi. 6: \"Can that which\nis unsavoury be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white\nof an egg?\" So in Isa. lix. 5: \"They hatch cockatrice' eggs, and weave\nthe spider's web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth.\"\n\nThere is another passage in the same book which refers to the\ngathering of eggs as mentioned in Deut. xxii. \"And my hand hath found\nas a nest the riches of the people: and as one gathereth eggs that are\nleft, have I gathered all the earth\" (Isa. x. 14). The well-known\npassage in Luke xi. 11, 12, however, evidently refers to the ordinary\nhen's egg, which was used then for food just as is the case at the\npresent day: \"If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father,\nwill he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give\nhim a serpent?\n\n\"Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?\"\n\nThere is but one passage in the Old Testament which has ever been\nconjectured to refer to the Domestic Fowl. It occurs in 1 Kings iv.\n22, 23, among the list of the daily provision of Solomon's household:\n\"And Solomon's provision for one day was thirty measures of fine\nflour, and threescore measures of meal,\n\n\"Ten fat oxen, and twenty oxen out of the pastures, and an hundred\nsheep, beside harts, and roebucks, and fallow-deer, and fatted fowl.\"\n\nNow the word which is here rendered as \"fatted fowl\" is in the Hebrew,\n_barberim_. Judging by the etymology of the word, which is derived\nfrom a root that signifies whiteness, or purity, it has been thought\nthat the correct rendering would be \"fattened white\" (birds). Some\nHebraists have conjectured that the white birds in question were\ngeese, this term including various white birds, swans among the\nnumber.\n\nMany persons think that the fatted fowl mentioned in the above-quoted\npassage were really Domestic Fowl, which Solomon had introduced into\nPalestine, together with various other birds and animals, by means of\nhis fleet. There may be truth in this conjecture, but, as there can be\nno certainty, we will pass from the Old Testament to the New.\n\nTHE DOMESTIC FOWL.\n\n\"_As a hen doth gather her brood under her wings._\"--LUKE xiii. 34.\n\nWe are all familiar with the passages in which the Domestic Fowl is\nmentioned in the New Testament. There is, for example, that touching\nimage employed by our Lord when lamenting over Jerusalem: \"O\nJerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them\nthat are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children\ntogether, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would\nnot!\" The reference is evidently made to the Domesticated Fowl, which\nin the time of our Lord was largely bred in the Holy Land.\n\nSome writers have taken objection to this statement in consequence of\na Rabbinical law which prohibited poultry from being kept within the\nwalls of Jerusalem, lest in their search for food they should scratch\nup any impurity which had been buried, and so defile the holy city.\nBut it must be remembered that in the time of Christ Jerusalem\nbelonged practically to the Romans, who held it with a garrison, and\nwho, together with other foreigners, would not trouble themselves\nabout any such prohibition, which would seem to them, as it does to\nus, exceedingly puerile, not to say unjustifiable. Whether the Jews\nobeyed or disregarded the prohibition, it is evident that it would\nhave been binding on the Jews alone, and that all Gentiles were exempt\nfrom it. Some commentators have even thought that the Domestic Fowl\nwas not known in Palestine until imported by the Romans.\n\nThat the bird was common in the days of our Lord is evident from the\nreference to the \"cock-crowing\" as a measure of time.\n\nEven on this subject there has been much controversy, some persons\nthinking that the words are to be understood in their literal sense,\nand others that they are merely metaphorical, and refer to the\ndivisions of time under the Romans, which were marked by the blowing\nof trumpets, conventionally termed cock-crowings. There is, however,\nno necessity to search for a metaphorical meaning when the literal\ninterpretation is clear and intelligible. At the present day, as in\nall probability in the time of our Lord, the crowing of the cocks is\nemployed as a means of reckoning time during the night, the birds\ncrowing at certain hours with almost mechanical regularity.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PEACOCK.\n\n The foreign curiosities imported by Solomon--The word _Tucciyim_\n and its various interpretations--Identity of the word with the\n Cingalese name of the Peacock--Reasons why the Peacock should\n have been brought to Solomon--Its subsequent neglect and\n extirpation.\n\n\nAmong the many foreign objects which were imported by Solomon into\nPalestine, we find that the Peacock is specially mentioned. (See a\npassage which has already been mentioned in connexion with ivory and\napes.) The sacred historian, after mentioning the ivory throne, the\ngolden shields and targets, that all the vessels in Solomon's house\nwere of gold, and that silver was so common as to be of no account,\nproceeds to give the reason for this profuse magnificence. \"For the\nking had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in\nthree years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver,\nivory, and apes, and peacocks\" (1 Kings x. 22).\n\nThe word which is here translated as Peacock is in the Hebrew\n_tucciyim_, and has been rendered in various modes. The Jewish Bible\naccepts the same translation as our own, and does not even affix the\nmark of doubt. Some Hebraists have rendered the word as \"parrots,\"\nwhile others have tried to identify the Tucciyim with guinea-fowls.\n\nIn the identification of any animal, much must necessarily depend on\nthe country in which it is found. Now, if the reader will refer to\npage 2 of this work, he will see that India and Ceylon are identified\nas the land visited by Solomon's ships. In the latter island are found\nall the three valuables which are mentioned in the above-quoted\npassage, and it is remarkable that the Cingalese name for the Peacock\nis so similar to the Hebrew word, that we have every reason to believe\nthat the word _tucciyim_ or _tuyeyim_ is in reality a Hebraic form of\nthe Cingalese tokei. A similar resemblance of name occurs in the\nHebrew and Cingalese terms for ape and elephant.\n\nThat this magnificent bird should have been one of those creatures\nthat were imported by Solomon is almost certain. It would be imported\nfor the same reason as the apes; namely, for the purpose of adding to\nthe glories of Solomon's house, and no bird could have been selected\nwhich would have a more magnificent effect than the Peacock. Moreover,\nalthough unknown in Palestine, it is extremely plentiful in its native\nland, inhabiting the jungle by thousands, and, by a curious\ncoincidence, being invariably most plentiful in those spots which are\nmost frequented by tigers. In many parts of the country, great numbers\nof Peacocks frequent the temples, and live amicably with the sacred\nmonkeys, passing their lives in absolute security, protected by the\nsanctity of the place.\n\nTheir numbers, therefore, would render them easily accessible to\nSolomon's envoys, who would purchase them at a cheap rate from the\nnative dealers, while their surpassing beauty would render them sure\nof a sale on their arrival in Jerusalem. Indeed, their beauty made so\ngreat an impression that they are separately mentioned by the sacred\nchronicler, the Peacock and the ape being the only two animals that\nare thought worthy of enumeration.\n\nIt seems that after Solomon's death the breed of Peafowl was not kept\nup, owing in all probability to the troubles which beset the throne\nafter that magnificent monarch died.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PARTRIDGE.\n\n The word _Kore_ and its signification--The Partridge upon the\n mountains--David's simile--The Desert Partridge and its\n habits--Hunting the Partridge with sticks--Eggs of the\n Partridge--A disputed reading, and probable signification of the\n passage--Egg-hunting in Palestine--The various species of\n Partridge--The Francolin and the Sand-grouse.\n\n\nThere is a bird mentioned in the Old Testament, which, although its\nname is only given twice, is a very interesting bird to all students\nof the Scriptures, both passages giving an insight into the\nmanners and customs of the scarcely changing East. This is\nthe bird called in the Hebrew Kore, a word which has been generally\naccepted as signifying some kind of Partridge. There is no doubt that,\nlike most other Hebrew names of animated beings, the word is a\ncollective one, signifying a considerable number of species.\n\n [Illustration: THE PEACOCK.\n\n \"Once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and\n silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.\" 1 KINGS x. 22.]\n\nThe first passage occurs in 1 Sam. xxvi. 20. When David was being\npursued by Saul, and had been forced to escape from the city and hide\nhimself in the rocky valleys, he compared himself to the Partridge,\nwhich frequented exactly the same places: \"The king of Israel is come\nout to seek a flea, as when one doth hunt a partridge upon the\nmountains.\"\n\nThe appositeness of this simile is perfect. The bird to which David\nalluded was in all probability the Desert Partridge (_Ammoperdix\nHeyii_), a species which especially haunts rocky and desert places,\nand even at the present day is exceedingly plentiful about the Cave of\nAdullam. The males, when they think themselves unobserved, are fond of\nchallenging, or calling to each other in a loud ringing note, a\npeculiarity that has earned for the bird the Hebrew name of Kore, or\n\"the caller.\"\n\nIt is a very active bird, not taking to flight if it can escape by\nmeans of its legs, and, when pursued or disturbed, running with great\nswiftness to some rocky cleft in which it may hide itself, taking care\nto interpose, as it runs, stones or other obstacles between itself and\nthe object of its alarm. Thus, then, it will be seen how close was the\nparallel between this bird and David, who was forced, like the\nPartridge, to seek for refuge in the rocky caves.\n\nBut the parallel becomes even closer when we come to examine the full\nmeaning of the passage. The Partridge is at the present day hunted on\nthe mountains exactly as was the case in the time of David. The usual\nhunters are boys, who provide themselves with a supply of stout sticks\nabout eighteen inches in length, and, armed with these, they chase the\nbirds, hurling the sticks one after the other along the ground, so as\nto strike the Partridge as it runs. Generally, several hunters chase\nthe same bird, some of them throwing the sticks along the ground,\nwhile others hurl them just above the bird, so that if it should take\nto flight, it maybe struck as it rises into the air. By\npertinaciously chasing an individual bird, the hunters tire it, and\ncontrive to come so close that they are certain to strike it.\n\n [Illustration: THE GREEK PARTRIDGE.\n\n \"_A partridge upon the mountains._\"--1 SAM. xxvi. 20.]\n\nRude as this mode of bird-hunting may seem, it is still employed in\nsome parts of England, and is effective even against birds far more\nactive on the wing than the Partridge. I have seen snipe killed in the\nNew Forest by being hunted down with sticks. Squirrels are chased and\nkilled in a similar manner, except that the \"bolts,\" or the sticks for\nsquirrel-hunting, are weighted with lead at one end.\n\nThe reader will now see how perfect is the image. Driven from the\ncity, David was forced to wander, together with the Desert Partridge,\nupon the hill-sides, and, like that bird, his final refuge is the\nrock. Then came the hunters and pursued him, driving him from place to\nplace, as the boys hunt the Partridge, until he was weary of his life,\nand exclaimed in his despair, \"I shall now perish one day by the hand\nof Saul.\"\n\nThe second passage in which the word _kore_ is found occurs in Jer.\nxvii. 11: \"As the partridge sitteth on eggs, and hatcheth them not; so\nhe that getteth riches, and not by right, shall leave them in the\nmidst of his days, and at his end shall be a fool.\" The marginal\nreading of this passage gives the sense in a slightly different form,\nand commences the verse as follows: \"As the partridge gathereth\n(young) which she hath not brought forth, so he,\" &c. The Jewish Bible\ngives the whole passage rather differently from both these readings:\n\"A partridge hatching what it hath not laid (_or_ borne), is he that\ngetteth (_or_ maketh) riches, and not by right (_or_ judgment): he\nshall leave them in the midst (_or_ half) of his days, and at his end\nshall be base.\"\n\nTaking all these readings, and comparing them with the original, with\neach other, and with the context, we can have but little doubt that\nreference is made by the prophet to the number of unborn, _i.e._\nunhatched, eggs on which the Partridge sits, but which are so often\ntaken from her before they can be hatched. Just as hunting the\nPartridge is an acknowledged sport among the inhabitants of the\nuncultivated parts of Palestine, so is searching for the eggs of the\nbird a regular business at the proper time of year.\n\nThe Partridges of Palestine are, like those of our own land,\nexceedingly prolific birds, laying a wonderful number of eggs, more\nthan twenty being sometimes found in a single nest. These eggs are\nused for food, and the consumption of them is very great, so that many\na Partridge has been deprived of her expected family: she has sat upon\neggs, and hatched them not.\n\n\nOf these birds several species inhabit Palestine. There is, for\nexample, the Desert Partridge, which has already been mentioned. It is\nbeautifully, though not brilliantly, coloured, and may be known by the\nwhite spot behind the eye, the purple and chestnut streaks on the\nsides, and the orange bill and legs. These, however, soon lose their\ncolour after death.\n\nThen there is the Greek Partridge (_Caccabis saxatilis_), which is\neven more plentiful than the preceding species, and is more widely\nspread. It is a large bird of its kind, being much larger than our\nEnglish species, and may be known by its size, the dark red legs and\nbeak, and the bold bars on the sides.\n\nMr. Tristram suggests, with much probability, that the Francolin, or\nBlack Partridge of India, and the Sand-Grouse, may be included among\nthe number of the birds which are included under the common name of\nKore. The latter bird is extremely plentiful in Palestine, and, in all\nprobability, was classed by the unobservant Jews with the true\nPartridge.\n\n\n\n\nTHE QUAIL.\n\n Signification of the word _Sel\u00e2v_--Various passages in which the\n word is mentioned--The locust, the stork, and the\n sand-grouse--Spreading the birds around the camp--Migration of\n the Quail--Drying the Quails for food--Modes of catching the\n Quail in the East--The Quail-hunters of Northern\n Africa--Quarrelsome nature of the bird--Quail-fighting in the\n East--How the Quails were brought to the Israelites.\n\n\nIn one or two parts of the Old Testament is found a word which has\nbeen translated in the Authorized Version of the Bible as QUAIL.\n\nThe word is _sel\u00e2v_, and in every case where it is mentioned it is\nused with reference to the same occurrence; namely, the providing of\nflesh-meat in the wilderness, where the people could find no food. As\nthe passages remarkably bear upon each other, it will be advisable to\nquote them in the order in which they come.\n\nThe first mention of the Sel\u00e2v occurs in Exod. xvi. Only a few days\nafter the Israelites had passed the Red Sea, they began to complain of\nthe desert land into which Moses had led them, and openly said that\nthey wished they had never left the land of their slavery, where they\nhad plenty to eat. According to His custom, pitying their\nnarrow-minded and short-sighted folly, the natural result of the long\nservitude to which they had been subject, the Lord promised to send\nboth bread and flesh-meat.\n\n\"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,\n\n [Illustration: THE QUAIL.\n\n \"_The people asked, and He brought quails._\"--PSALM cv. 40.]\n\n\"I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto\nthem, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall\nbe filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am the Lord your God.\n\n\"And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the\ncamp\" (ver. 11-13).\n\nThe next passage records a similar circumstance, which occurred about\na year afterwards, when the Israelites were tired of eating nothing\nbut the manna, and again wished themselves back in Egypt. \"And there\nwent forth a wind from the Lord, and brought quails from the sea, and\nlet them fall by the camp, as it were a day's journey on this side,\nand as it were a day's journey on the other side, round about the\ncamp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the earth.\n\n\"And the people stood up all that day, and all that night, and all the\nnext day, and they gathered the quails: he that gathered least\ngathered ten homers; and they spread them all abroad for themselves\nround about the camp\" (Numb. xi. 31, 32).\n\nThe last passage in which Quails are mentioned occurs in the Psalms.\nIn Ps. cv. are enumerated the various wonders done on behalf of the\nIsraelites, and among them is specially mentioned this gift of the\nQuails and manna. \"The people asked, and He brought quails, and\nsatisfied them with the bread of heaven\" (ver. 40).\n\nWe now have to ask ourselves what the word _sel\u00e2v_ really means. Some\ncommentators have thought that it signified a species of locust,\ninsects which travel in vast multitudes, and are always carried with\nthe wind, thus agreeing with the statement that the Selavim were\nbrought by the wind. Others have imagined that the Selavim were\nflying-fish, blown on shore as they rose from the sea after their\nfashion. Putting aside other reasons against these interpretations,\nthe Psalms contain a passage which effectually contradicts them, and\nproves that the Sel\u00e2v was a bird of some kind.\n\n\"He had commanded the clouds from above, and opened the doors of\nheaven,\n\n\"And had rained down manna upon them to eat, and had given them of the\ncorn of heaven.\n\n\"Man did eat angels' food: He sent them meat to the full.\n\n\"He caused an east wind to blow in the heaven; and by His power He\nbrought in the south wind.\n\n\"He rained flesh also upon them as dust, and feathered fowls like as\nthe sand of the sea\" (Ps. lxxviii. 23-27).\n\nFrom this passage it is evident that the Selavim which were sent\ntogether with the manna were birds of some kind--\"fowls of wing,\"\naccording to the literal sense of the Hebrew; so that the theory that\nthey were insects or fish must be dismissed as untenable. The\nquestion now remains, with what species of bird are we to identify the\nSel\u00e2v?\n\nRespecting this question, there has been great discussion, chiefly\narising from the fact that the various commentators endeavoured to\nshow that the Sel\u00e2v was not the Quail, but some other bird. Some, for\nexample, take it to be the white stork, which is very plentiful in\nPalestine, and sometimes flies in such numbers that the sky is\ndarkened as the winged host passes by. They base this supposition on\nthe stature of the bird, which is so tall that it stands about \"two\ncubits high upon the face of the earth.\" So it does, but this is a\nvery insufficient reason for translating the word _sel\u00e2v_ as \"stork.\"\n\nIn the first place, the words \"as it were two cubits high upon the\nface of the earth\" certainly do not refer to the stature of the\nindividual birds. They are popularly taken to signify that the earth\nwas covered with the bodies of the Selavim to the depth of three feet.\n\nThis, however, can hardly have been the fact, as in that case they\nwould have utterly overwhelmed the whole camp, and crushed the tents\nby their weight. Moreover, there would have been no need of gathering\nthem up, as they would have lain so thickly on the ground that the\nonly trouble would have been to make a passage through them. It is not\nvery easy to force a passage through snow a yard in depth, while to do\nso through the same depth of birds would have been almost impossible.\n\nNeither could the Israelites have \"spread them all abroad for\nthemselves round about the camp.\" If the Selavim lay to the depth of a\nyard \"as it were a day's journey on this side, and a day's journey on\nthe other side of the camp,\" _i.e._ some eight or ten miles all round\nit, there would have been no space whereon the birds could have been\nspread. The sentence in question has a totally different\nsignification, and refers to the height from the ground at which the\nbirds fly. Taken in this sense, the whole passage falls into harmony,\nwhereas in any other it involves a difficulty.\n\nIf the ordinary interpretation of _sel\u00e2v_ by \"Quail\" be accepted, the\ndescription is exactly correct. The Quails fly in vast flocks, and,\nbeing weak-winged birds, never fly against the direction of the wind.\nThey will wait for days until the wind blows in the required\ndirection, and will then take wing in countless multitudes; so that in\nan hour or two a spot on which not a Quail could be seen is covered\nwith them.\n\nOn account of their short wings, they never rise to any great height,\neven when crossing the sea, while on land they fly at a very low\nelevation, merely skimming over the ground, barely a yard or \"two\ncubits high upon the face of the earth.\" We may now see how needless\nit is to attribute the two cubits to the stature of the bird, or to\nthe depth at which they lay on the ground.\n\nThere are other reasons why the Sel\u00e2v could not be any species of\nstork. In the first place, all the stork tribe are included among the\nlist of unclean birds, and it is not likely that the Almighty would\nhave neutralized His own edicts by providing food which the Israelites\nwere forbidden to eat. In the next place, even had the flesh of the\nstork been lawful, it is of so unpleasant a nature that the people\ncould not have eaten it. For similar reasons we may dismiss the\ntheories which consider the Sel\u00e2v to be a goose or water-fowl of any\nkind.\n\nSome persons have thought that the sand-grouse is the Sel\u00e2v. In the\nfirst place, the flesh of this bird is hard, tasteless, and disliked\nby those who have tried it; so that the Israelites would not have been\ntempted to eat it. In the next, it is a strong-winged and swift-footed\nbird, and would not have satisfied the required conditions. It flies\nhigh in the air, instead of merely skimming over the ground, and when\nit alights is fresh and active, and cannot easily be caught. The\nQuail, on the contrary, after it has flown for any distance, is so\ncompletely tired out that when it alights it crouches to the earth,\nand will allow itself to be picked up by hand. It has even been\ntrodden to death under a horse's feet.\n\nMoreover, the flesh of the Quail is peculiarly excellent, and would be\na great temptation to men who had passed so long a time without eating\nanimal food. Another corroboration of the identity of the Quail and\nthe Sel\u00e2v is to be found in the mode in which the flesh is prepared at\nthe present day. As soon as the birds have arrived, they are captured\nin vast multitudes, on account of their weariness. Many are consumed\nat once, but great numbers are preserved for future use by being split\nand laid out to dry in the sun, precisely as the Israelites are said\nto have spread out the Selavim \"all abroad for themselves round about\nthe camp.\"\n\nIt is rather remarkable that the Arabs of the present day use a word\nalmost exactly resembling _sel\u00e2v_ to represent the Quail. The word is\n_salwa_, given by one of the older writers on the subject as _selaw_.\n\nAccepting, therefore, the Sel\u00e2v and Quail to be identical, we may\nproceed to the description of the bird.\n\nIt is small, plump, and round-bodied, with the head set closely on the\nshoulders. Owing to this peculiarity of form, it has its Arab name,\nwhich signifies plumpness or fatness. The wings are pressed closely to\nthe body, and the tail is pointed, very short, and directed downwards,\nso that it almost appears to be absent, and the bird seems to be even\nmore plump than really is the case.\n\nSeveral modes of capturing these birds are still practised in the\nEast, and were probably employed, not only on the two occasions\nmentioned in Exodus and Numbers, but on many others of which the\nScriptural narrative takes no notice. One very simple plan is, for the\nhunters to select a spot on which the birds are assembled, and to ride\nor walk round them in a large circle, or rather in a constantly\ndiminishing spiral. The birds are by this process driven closer and\ncloser together, until at the last they are packed in such masses that\na net can be thrown over them, and a great number captured in it.\n\nSometimes a party of hunters unite to take the Quails, and employ a\nsimilar manoeuvre, except that, instead of merely walking round the\nQuails, they approach simultaneously from opposite points, and then\ncircle round them until the birds are supposed to be sufficiently\npacked. At a given signal they all converge upon the terrified birds,\nand take them by thousands at a time.\n\nIn Northern Africa these birds are captured in a very similar fashion.\nAs soon as notice is given that a flight of Quails has settled, all\nthe men of the village turn out with their great burnouses or cloaks.\nMaking choice of some spot as a centre, where a quantity of brushwood\ngrows or is laid down, the men surround it on all sides, and move\nslowly towards it, spreading their cloaks in their outstretched hands,\nand flapping them like the wings of huge birds. Indeed, when a man is\nseen from a little distance performing this act, he looks more like a\nhuge bat than a human being.\n\nAs the men gradually converge upon the brushwood, the Quails naturally\nrun towards it for shelter, and at last they all creep under the\ntreacherous shade. Still holding their outspread cloaks in their\nextended hands, the hunters suddenly run to the brushwood, fling their\ncloaks over it, and so enclose the birds in a trap from which they\ncannot escape. Much care is required in this method of hunting, lest\nthe birds should take to flight, and so escape. The circle is\ntherefore made of very great size, and the men who compose it advance\nso slowly that the Quails prefer to use their legs rather than their\nwings, and do not think of flight until their enemies are so close\nupon them that their safest course appears to be to take refuge in the\nbrushwood.\n\nBoys catch the Quails in various traps and springes, the most\ningenious of which is a kind of trap, the door of which overbalances\nitself by the weight of the bird.\n\nBy reason of the colour of the Quail, and its inveterate habit of\nkeeping close to the ground, it easily escapes observation, and even\nthe most practised eye can scarcely distinguish a single bird, though\nthere may be hundreds within a very small compass. Fortunately for the\nhunters, and unfortunately for itself, it betrays itself by its shrill\nwhistling note, which it frequently emits, and which is so peculiar\nthat it will at once direct the hunter to his prey.\n\nThis note is at the same time the call of the male to the female and a\nchallenge to its own sex. Like all the birds of its group, the Quail\nis very combative, and generally fights a battle for the possession of\neach of its many mates. It is not gifted with such weapons of offence\nas some of its kinsfolk, but it is none the less quarrelsome, and\nfights in its own way as desperately as the game-cock of our own\ncountry.\n\nIndeed, in the East, it is used for exactly the same purpose as the\ngame-cock. Battles between birds and beasts, not to say men, are the\ncommon amusement with Oriental potentates, and, when they are tired of\nwatching the combats of the larger animals, they have Quail-fights in\ntheir own chambers. The birds are selected for this purpose, and are\nintentionally furnished with stimulating food, so as to render them\neven more quarrelsome than they would be by nature. Partridges are\nemployed for the same cruel purpose; and as both these birds are\neasily obtained, and are very pugnacious, they are especially suited\nfor the sport.\n\nTwo passages occur in the Scriptures which exactly explain the mode in\nwhich the Quails were sent to the Israelites. The first is in Ps.\nlxxviii. 26. The Psalmist mentions that the Lord \"caused an east wind\nto blow in the heaven, and by His power He brought in the south wind.\"\nHere, on examining the geographical position of the Israelites, we see\nexactly how the south-east wind would bring the Quails.\n\nThe Israelites had just passed the Red Sea, and had begun to\nexperience a foretaste of the privations which they were to expect in\nthe desert through which they had to pass. Passing northwards in their\nusual migrations, the birds would come to the coast of the Red Sea,\nand there would wait until a favourable wind enabled them to cross the\nwater. The south-east wind afforded them just the very assistance\nwhich they needed, and they would naturally take advantage of it.\n\nIt is remarkable how closely the Scriptural narrative agrees with the\nhabits of the Quail, the various passages, when compared together,\nprecisely coinciding with the character of the bird. In Exod. xvi. 13\nit is mentioned that \"at even the quails came up and covered the\ncamp.\" Nocturnal flight is one of the characteristics of the Quail.\nWhen possible, they invariably fly by night, and in this manner escape\nmany of the foes which would make great havoc among their helpless\ncolumns if they were to fly by day.\n\nThe identity of the Sel\u00e2v with the common Quail is now seen to be\nestablished. In the first place, we have the name still surviving in\nthe Arabic language. Next, the various details of the Scriptural\nnarrative point so conclusively to the bird, that even if we were to\nput aside the etymological corroboration, we could have but little\ndoubt on the subject. There is not a detail which is not correct. The\ngregarious instinct of the bird, which induces it to congregate in\nvast numbers; its habit of migration; its inability to fly against the\nwind, and the necessity for it to await a favourable breeze; its\npractice of flying by night, and its custom of merely skimming over\nthe surface of the ground; the ease with which it is captured; the\nmode of preserving by drying in the sun, and the proverbial delicacy\nof its flesh, are characteristics which all unite in the Quail.\n\n\nBefore closing our account of the Quail, it will be as well to devote\na short space to the nature of the mode by which the Israelites were\ntwice fed. Commentators who were unacquainted with the natural history\nof the bird have represented the whole occurrence as a miraculous one,\nand have classed it with the division of the Red Sea and of the\nJordan, with the various plagues by which Pharaoh was induced to\nrelease the Israelites, and with many other events which we are\naccustomed to call miracles.\n\nIn reality, there is scarcely anything of a miraculous character about\nthe event, and none seems to have been claimed for it. The Quails were\nnot created at the moment expressly for the purpose of supplying the\npeople with food, nor were they even brought from any great distance.\nThey were merely assisted in the business on which they were engaged,\nnamely, their migration or customary travel from south to north, and\nwaiting on the opposite side of the narrow sea for a south-east wind.\nThat such a wind should blow was no miracle. The Quails expected it to\nblow, and without it they could not have crossed the sea. That it was\nmade to blow earlier than might have been the case is likely enough,\nbut that is the extent of the miraculous character of the event.\nTaking the word in its ordinary sense, no miracle was wrought, simply\nbecause none was wanted. Granting to the fullest extent that He who\narranged the course of the world can alter His arrangements as easily\nas He made them, we cannot but see that in this case no alteration was\nneeded, and that, in consequence, none was made.\n\n\n\n\nTHE RAVEN.\n\n Signification of the word _Oreb_--The Raven tribe plentiful in\n Palestine--The Raven and the Dove--Elijah and the\n Ravens--Various explanations of the circumstance--Feeding the\n young Ravens--Luis of Grenada's sermon--The white Raven of\n ancient times--An old legend--Reference to the blackness of the\n Raven's plumage--Desert-loving habits of the Raven--Its mode of\n attacking the eye--Notions of the old commentators--Ceremonial\n use of the Raven--Return of the Ravens--Cunning of the\n bird--Nesting-places of the Raven--The magpie and its\n character--The starling--Its introduction into Palestine--The\n Rabbi perplexed--Solution of the difficulty.\n\n\nIt is more than probable that, while the Hebrew word _oreb_ primarily\nsignifies the bird which is so familiar to us under the name of RAVEN,\nit was also used by the Jews in a much looser sense, and served to\ndesignate any of the Corvid\u00e6, or Crow tribe, such as the raven itself,\nthe crow, the rook, the jackdaw, and the like. We will first take the\nword in its restricted sense, and then devote a brief space to its\nmore extended signification.\n\nAs might be expected from the cosmopolitan nature of the Raven, it is\nvery plentiful in Palestine, and even at the present time is\napparently as firmly established as it was in the days when the\nvarious Scriptural books were written.\n\nThere are few birds which are more distinctly mentioned in the Holy\nScriptures than the Raven, though the passages in which its name\noccurs are comparatively few. It is the first bird which is mentioned\nin the Scriptures, its name occurring in Gen. viii. 7: \"And it came to\npass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark\nwhich he had made;\n\n\"And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the\nwaters were dried up from off the earth.\"\n\nHere we have, at the very outset, a characteristic account of the\nbird. It left the ark, and flew to and fro, evidently for the purpose\nof seeking food. The dove, which immediately followed the Raven, acted\nin a different manner. She flew from the ark in search of food, and,\nfinding none, was forced to return again. The Raven, on the contrary,\nwould find plenty of food in the bodies of the various animals that\nhad been drowned, and were floating on the surface of the waters, and,\ntherefore, needed not to enter again into the ark. The context shows\nthat it made the ark a resting-place, and that it \"went forth to and\nfro,\" or, as the Hebrew Bible renders the passage, \"in going and\nreturning,\" until the waters had subsided. Here, then, is boldly drawn\nthe distinction between the two birds, the carrion-eater and the\nfeeder on vegetable substances--a distinction to which allusion has\nalready been made in the history of the dove.\n\n [Illustration: THE RAVEN.\n\n \"_Who provideth for the raven his food?_\"--JOB xxxviii. 41.]\n\nPassing over the declaration in Lev. xi. 15 and Deut. xiv. 14, that\nevery Raven (_i.e._ the Raven and all its tribe) is unclean, we come\nto the next historical mention of the bird. This occurs in 1 Kings\nxvii. When Elijah had excited the anger of Ahab by prophesying three\nyears of drought, he was divinely ordered to take refuge by the brook\nCherith, one of the tributaries of the Jordan. \"And it shall be, that\nthou shalt drink of the brook; and I have commanded the ravens\n[_orebim_] to feed thee there.\n\n\"So he went and did according unto the word of the Lord: for he went\nand dwelt by the brook Cherith, that is before Jordan.\n\n\"And the ravens brought him bread and flesh in the morning, and bread\nand flesh in the evening, and he drank of the brook.\"\n\nIn this passage we have a history of a purely miraculous character. It\nis not one that can be explained away. Some have tried to do so by\nsaying that the banished prophet found the nests of the Ravens, and\ntook from them daily a supply of food for his sustenance. The\nrepetition of the words \"bread and flesh\" shows that the sacred writer\nhad no intention of signifying a mere casual finding of food which the\nRavens brought for their young, but that the prophet was furnished\nwith a constant and regular supply of bread and meat twice in the day.\nIt is a statement which, if it be not accepted as the account of a\nmiracle, must be rejected altogether.\n\nI may here mention that an explanation of the passage has been offered\nby some commentators, who render the word _orebim_ as \"Arabs,\" and so\narrive at the conclusion that the prophet was fed in his retirement by\nthe Arab tribes which came to the brook for water. Others have thought\nthat the Orebim were the inhabitants of a village called Orbo, near\nthe Cherith. There is, however, no need of any such explanations. The\naccount of the prophet's flight to the Cherith and of the daily supply\nof food which he received has been accepted as a simple statement of\nfacts by all Jewish writers, and there is no alternative but either to\naccept it in the same sense or to reject it.\n\nThis part of the subject naturally leads to certain passages in which\nthe feeding of the young Ravens is mentioned. See, for example, Job\nxxxviii. 41: \"Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young\nones cry unto God, they wander for lack of meat.\" This passage is\nrendered rather differently and more forcibly in the Jewish Bible.\n\"Who provideth for the raven his food, when his young ones cry unto\nGod, and wander for lack of meat?\" A passage of similar import occurs\nin Ps. cxlvii. 9: \"He giveth to the beast his food, and to the young\nravens which cry.\" An evident reference is made to these passages in\nLuke xii. 24: \"Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap;\nwhich neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much\nmore are ye better than the fowls?\"\n\nIn all these cases reference is made to a curious idea which prevailed\nrespecting the Raven. It was thought that the Raven was a cruel\nparent, and that after the eggs were hatched it cared nothing for the\nyoung until they were full fledged. As, moreover, the bird was thought\nto be peculiarly late in attaining its plumage, the young Ravens must\nall die of hunger, were they not fed in some remarkable manner. This\nsubject is treated at some length by Luis of Grenada in his Sermons.\nAs the passage in question is a very curious one, I give both the\noriginal and a translation. For the latter I am indebted to the Rev.\nC. J. Smith, author of \"Synonyms and Antonyms,\" who has preserved,\nwith much success, the quaint structure of the language.\n\n\"Dominica XIV. post Pent. Concio 1:\n\n\"Nisi h\u00e6c enim omnia magnam nobis admirationis materiam divin\u00e6que\nprovidenti\u00e6 notitiam pr\u00e6berent, nequaquam Dominus inter cetera\nsapienti\u00e6 et providenti\u00e6 su\u00e6 argumenta hoc etiam commemoraret, cum ad\nJob ait: 'Quis pr\u00e6parat corvo escam suam, quando pulli ejus clamant ad\nDeum vagantes e\u00f2 qu\u00f2d non habeant cibos?'[1] Et in Psal.: 'Qui dat\njumentis escam ipsorum et pullis corvorum invocantibus eum.'[2]\n\n [1] Job xxxviii.\n\n [2] Ps. cxlvii.\n\n\"Cur autem hoc in loco pullorum corvi pr\u00e6cipu\u00e8 meminerit, in causa\nest, quod in his miro modo singularis providenti\u00e6 cura elucet. Ait\nenim interpres quidam corvorum pullos eum implumes adhuc sunt,\ncandorem pr\u00e6 se ferre: ideoque a parentibus ut nothos negligi, quod\neorum non referant colorem. Quo tempore divina providentia, qu\u00e6\nnusquam dormit, eos ad se clamantes alit. Vermiculos enim quosdam in\nnidulo nasci constituit, quorum esu sustentantur donec nono tandem die\nnascentibus plumis parentum colorem referant, atque ita demum ab illis\nnutriantur.\n\n\n\"Cum igitur divina providentia nulla in re neque animalculis istis\netiam si a patribus deserantur desit, quanta ilia diffidentia est, qu\u00e6\nsolis hominibus eam deesse profitetur? Si homo inter omnes inferioris\nhujus mundi creaturas nobilissimum et pulcherrimum animal est, si\nsolus ipse Dei imagine insignitus, si ipse hujus magn\u00e6 famili\u00e6\nprinceps ac dominus est, si ejus obsequio cuncta militant, si omnia\nrerum conditor subiecit pedibus ejus oves et boves universas, insuper\net pecora campi, &c. qui fieri potest ut cum hujus mundi moderator D\u00f1s\nnullum neque animalculum neque vermiculum a providenti\u00e6 su\u00e6 cura\nexcludat, sed omnibus abunde omnia suppeditat, pium hominem (cujus\nobsequio cuncta destinavit) fame et inedia confici patiatur. Si pater\naliquis filii sui familiam, servos, ancillas, et jumenta diligenter\ncuraret, illisque necessaria abunde provideret, quomodo filium fame\nperire sineret, cujus familiam tanta cura fovet et alit? Quis enim hoc\nin animum inducere possit? H\u00e6c ijitur altera ratio est qua celestis\nMagister diffidentiam nostram curare, et spem alere atque fulcire\nstudet.\"\n\n\"Fourteenth Sunday after Pentecost, Sermon 1:\n\n\"For if it were not that all these things afford to us great matter of\nadmiration and demonstration of the providence of God, it were in vain\nthat the Lord, among other tokens of His wisdom and providence, had\nselected this also, when He saith in Job: 'Who provideth for the raven\nhis food? when his young ones cry unto God, wandering for lack of\nmeat.' And in the Psalms: 'Who giveth their own food to the cattle,\nand to the young ravens that call upon Him.'\n\n\"Now that in this place He hath been mainly mindful of the ravens'\nyoung, is partly for this cause, that marvellously in them the\nsingular care of Providence doth show forth. For a certain annotator\nsaith, that the young ravens while as yet they are unfledged do appear\nof whiteness, and therefore are neglected of their parents as if they\nwere bastards, seeing that they resemble not their colour. At which\ntime Divine Providence, who nowhere sleepeth, doth feed them who call\nupon Himself. For He causeth certain vermicles (small worms) to be\nbred in the little nest, by eating of which they are sustained, until\nat length on the ninth day, the feathers beginning to grow, they\nresemble the colour of their parents, and so come to be nourished by\nthem.\n\n\"Seeing then that Divine Providence is never wanting in any matter,\nnot even to these little creatures, though they be deserted of their\nparents, how great is that distrust which averreth that it is wanting\nunto men alone! If man be among all the creatures of this lower world\nthe noblest and the fairest of things; if he alone be made illustrious\nby God's image; if he himself be of this great family the leader and\nlord; if in obedience to him all things serve; if the Constructor of\nall things hath put under his feet 'all sheep and oxen, yea, and the\nbeasts of the field;' how shall it be that when the Lord, the Ruler of\nthis world, shutteth out none, neither insect nor worm, from the care\nof His providence, but supplieth abundantly all things for all, He\nshould suffer the righteous man, for whose service He hath appointed\nall things, to perish of hunger and lack of food?\n\n\"If it be that every father would diligently care for his son's\nhousehold, and men-servants, and maid-servants, and cattle, and\nprovide them abundantly with all things needful, how should He suffer\nHis sons to perish whose families He cherisheth and feedeth with so\ngreat care? Who, indeed, could harbour such a thought? This then is\nanother consideration whereby the heavenly Master seeks to cure our\ndistrust, and to feed and stay our hope.\"\n\nSome of the old writers improved on this legend by saying that the\nworms crawled into the mouths of the young Ravens, so that the birds\nhad not even the trouble of picking them up.\n\nSome of the ancient Jewish writers had an idea that the Raven was\noriginally a white bird, and that its colour was changed by way of\npunishment for its evil disposition and deceitful conduct. A similar\nidea was held by the old mythological writers. They said that the\nRaven was formerly the favourite bird of Apollo, and that it was\ncelebrated for its sweet song and snowy white plumage. Part of its\nduty was to bring water for its master from the fountain Hippocrene.\n\nOne day, instead of doing its duty, the bird amused itself in the\ngarden, and at last fell asleep. Fearful when it awoke that it should\nbe punished for its carelessness, the cunning Raven snatched up a\nsnake, killed it, and brought it to Apollo, saying that the serpent\nhad disputed the passage to the fountain, and that, after a long\nfight, it had just been killed. Apollo, angry with the bird for having\ntold a lie, drove it from his presence, and as it fled its musical\nvoice turned into a harsh croak, and its white plumage became black.\n\n \"'Liar!' exclaimed the god,\n The Python-killer, as from his keen eye\n The lightning darted, 'Me wouldst thou deceive\n With such a wretched tale! Hence, hence! begone!\n Black as thy falsehood fly through shuddering air,\n A bird of lonely night! Dumb be thy voice\n Of sweetest melody: henceforth thy cry\n Tell but of woes and horrors, a wild shriek\n Of darkness and dismay.'\"\n\n _Knight's Quarterly Magazine_\n\nReference to the blackness of the Raven's plumage is made in the Song\nof Solomon. \"My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten\nthousand.\n\n\"His beard is as the most fine gold, his locks are bushy and black as\na Raven.\" (Cant. v. 10, 11.) A similar expression is common among\nourselves.\n\nOn account of its mode of life, the Raven cannot exist in a wild state\nin cultivated ground. Hence it has disappeared from the greater part\nof England, and is seldom to be seen except on wide moors or in large\nforests. Cultivated ground affords it scarcely any food, and it is\ntherefore a bird of the wilderness rather than of the towns.\n\nLike all feeders on carrion, it is wonderfully quick in detecting a\ndead or dying animal, and rivals the vulture itself in the sharpness\nof its vision. If any one who is passing over a part of the country\nwhere Ravens still survive, should wish to see one of the birds, he\nhas only to lie flat on the ground, and keep his eyes nearly shut, so\nas only to see through the lashes. Should there be a Raven within many\nmiles, it is sure to discover the apparently dead body, and to alight\nat no great distance, walking round and round, with its peculiar\nsidelong gait, and, if it be not checked in time, will make a dash at\nthe eye of the prostrate individual, and probably blind him for life.\n\nThis habit of pecking at the eye is inherent in all the crow tribe,\nprobably because they know instinctively that if the animal will allow\nits eye to be pecked out it must be dead; and if it should still\npossess life, it would be blinded for the moment, so as to allow its\nassailant to escape. The Scriptures note this custom of the Raven, as\nwe see in Prov. xxx. 17: \"The eye that mocketh at his father and\ndespiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it\nout, and the young eagles shall eat it.\"\n\nThe desert-loving habit of the Raven is noticed in Isa. xxxiv. 11:\n\"The cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the\nraven shall dwell in it: and He shall stretch out upon it the line of\nconfusion, and the stones of emptiness.\"\n\n\nWe will now pass to the notices of the Raven as given by the writers\nand commentators of the Talmud.\n\nBeing an unclean bird, and one of ill omen, it was not permitted to\nperch on the roof of the Temple. According to some writers, it was\nkept off by means of scarecrows, and according to others, by long and\nsharp iron spikes set so closely together that there was no room for\nthe bird to pass between them. The latter is by far the more probable\naccount, as the Raven is much too cunning a bird to be deceived by a\nscarecrow for any length of time. It might be alarmed at the first\nsight of a strange object, but in a very short time it would hold all\nscarecrows in supreme contempt.\n\nIts carrion-eating propensities were well known to the ancient\nwriters, who must have had many opportunities of seeing the Raven\nunite with the vultures in consuming the bodies, not only of dead\nanimals, but of warriors killed in battle. So fond was the Raven of\nthis food that, according to those writers, the very smell of human\nblood attracted the bird; and, if a man accidentally cut himself, or\nif he were bled for some illness, the odour of the blood would bring\nround the spot all the Ravens of the place.\n\nThe punctuality with which the Raven, in common with all its kin,\nreturns to its roosting-place, was also familiar to the Talmudists,\nwho made rather an ingenious use of this habit. The ceremonial law of\nthe Jews required the greatest care in observing certain hours, and it\nwas especially necessary to know the precise time which marked the\nseparation of one day from another. This was ascertained easily enough\nas long as the day was clear, but in case of a dull, murky day, when\nthe course of the sun could not be traced, some other plan was needed.\n\nIn the olden times, no artificial means of measuring time were known,\nand the devout Jew was consequently fearful lest he might unwittingly\nbreak the law by doing on one day an act which ought to have been done\non another. A convenient method for ascertaining the time was,\nhowever, employed, and, as soon as the Ravens, rooks, and similar\nbirds were seen returning to their homes, the sun was supposed to be\nsetting.\n\nThis habit of returning regularly at the same time is mentioned by Mr.\nTristram in his \"Land of Israel:\"--\n\n\"Of all the birds of Jerusalem, the raven is decidedly the most\ncharacteristic and conspicuous. It is present everywhere to eye and\near, and the odours that float around remind us of its use. On the\nevening of our arrival we were perplexed by a call-note, quite new to\nus, mingling with the old familiar croak, and soon ascertained that\nthere must be a second species of raven along with the common _Corvus\ncorax_. This was the African species (_Corvus umbrinus_, Hed.), the\nashy-necked raven, a little smaller than the world-wide raven, and\nhere more abundant in individuals.\n\n\"Beside these, the rook (_Corvus agricola_, Trist.), the common grey,\nor hooded crow (_Corvus cornix_, L.), and the jackdaw (_Corvus\nmonedula_, L.), roost by hundreds in the sanctuary. We used to watch\nthem in long lines passing over our tents every morning at daybreak,\nand returning in the evening, the rooks in solid phalanx leading the\nway, and the ravens in loose order bringing up the rear, generally far\nout of shot. Before retiring for the night, popular assemblies of the\nmost uproarious character were held together in the trees of the\nKedron and Mount Olivet, and not until sunset did they withdraw in\nsilence, mingled indiscriminately, to their roosting-places on the\nwalls.\n\n\"My companions were very anxious to obtain specimens of these\nJerusalem birds, which could only be approached as they settled for\nthe night; but we were warned by the Consul that shooting them so\nclose to the mosque might be deemed a sacrilege by the Moslems, and\nprovoke an attack by the guardians of the Haram and the boys of the\nneighbourhood. They finally determined, nevertheless, to run the risk;\nand stationing themselves just before sunset in convenient\nhiding-places near the walls, at a given signal they fired\nsimultaneously, and, hastily gathering up the spoils, had retreated\nout of reach, and were hurrying to the tents before an alarm could be\nraised. The discharge of ten barrels had obtained fourteen specimens,\ncomprising five species.\n\n\"The same manoeuvre was repeated with equal success on another\nevening; but on the third occasion the ravens had learned wisdom by\nexperience, and, sweeping round Siloam, chose another route to their\ndormitory.\"\n\nThose who have tried to come within gunshot of a Raven, even in this\ncountry, can appreciate this anecdote, and can understand how the\nRaven would ever afterwards keep clear of a spot where the flash and\nsmoke of fire-arms had twice appeared.\n\nAn anecdote which authenticates this cautious turn of mind in the\nRaven is given in Mr. Thompson's work on the \"Natural History of\nIreland.\" There was a large yard in which the sparrows used to\ncongregate, and it was a custom of the owner to lay a train of corn\nfor the sparrows to eat, and then to rake the whole line with a\ndischarge from a gun concealed in an outhouse. A tame Raven lived\nabout the premises, and as soon as it saw any one carrying a gun\ntowards the fatal outhouse, it became much alarmed, and hurried off to\nhide itself. As soon as the gun was fired, out came the Raven from its\nplace of concealment, pounced on one of the dead sparrows, carried it\noff, and ate it in its private haunt.\n\nThe nest to which the Raven returns with such punctuality is placed in\nsome spot where it is safe from ordinary intruders. The tops of lofty\ntrees are favoured localities for the nest, and so are old towers, the\ninterior of caves, and clefts in lofty precipices. The nest is large\nand clumsy, and the bird, trusting in the inaccessible character of\nthe locality, troubles itself very little about concealment. The Raven\nis a peculiarly domestic bird, and a pattern of conjugal affection. It\npairs for life, and both male and female take their share of sitting\non the eggs and nurturing the young.\n\n\nThe old writers of whom mention has been made admitted that all the\nCorvid\u00e6 were signified by the word _oreb_. Sometimes they drew a\ndistinction between them, but, as a rule, the word _oreb_ might mean\nany of those birds, from a Raven to a starling.\n\nThe MAGPIE is one of those birds which is separately mentioned. Like\nthe Raven, it was thought to be harsh and cruel to its young, so that\nwhenever a man behaved badly to his children, either by neglect or by\nabsolute cruelty, he was called a Magpie-man by way of derision.\nSimilarly, a man of a morose or evil disposition was termed a\nRaven-hearted man. As, however, the Magpie is not entirely black, but\nhas some white in its plumage, it was held to be rather a better bird\nthan the Raven. Moreover, it is fond of haunting the habitations of\nmen, so that it was held to be of a softer nature than the Raven,\nwhich always kept itself as far from mankind as possible.\n\nLastly, we come to the Starling, which, as I have already mentioned,\nis considered as one of the Raven tribe, and is ranked under the name\nof Oreb. The old writers had no very great opinion of this bird, which\nthey considered as exceptionally quarrelsome, probably on account of\nits shrill, harsh cry. They had a curious proverb, \"Two Starlings\ncannot sleep in one bed,\" by which they meant that two quarrelsome\npeople ought not to associate together.\n\nThere is a rather curious legend respecting the introduction of the\nStarling into Palestine.\n\nMany years ago, a strange bird appeared in Jerusalem. It was caught,\nand brought before a celebrated Rabbi for examination, in order that\nhe might decide whether it belonged to the clean or the unclean birds.\nAfter examining it, he could not make up his mind to either side of\nthe question, and left the disputed point to be settled in a different\nway.\n\nHe ordered the bird to be placed on the roof of a house, and to be\ncarefully watched, in order that the birds which associated with it\nmight be noticed. For some time no birds of any kind would recognise\nthe stranger, until at last there came a Raven from Egypt, which\nclaimed acquaintance with it. In consequence of this, the Starling was\never afterwards classed with the Raven, and considered as an unclean\nbird. The Egyptian Raven which is here mentioned is described as being\na very small bird, scarcely larger, indeed, than the Starling itself.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE OSTRICH.\n\n Hebrew words designating the Ostrich--Description of the bird in\n the Book of Job--Ancient use of Ostrich plumes--Supposed\n heedlessness of eggs and young--Mode of depositing the\n eggs--Hatching them in the sand--Natural enemies of the\n Ostrich--Anecdote of Ostriches and their young--Alleged\n stupidity of the Ostrich--Methods of hunting and snaring the\n bird--The Ostrich in domestication--Speed of the Ostrich--The\n flesh of the bird prohibited to the Jews--Ostrich eggs and their\n uses--Food of the Ostrich--Mode of drinking--Cry of the Ostrich,\n and reference made to it in Micah.\n\n\nThere is rather a peculiarity about the manner in which this bird is\nmentioned in the Authorized Version of the Scriptures, and, unless we\ngo to the original Hebrew, we shall be greatly misled. In that version\nthe Ostrich is mentioned only three times, but in the Hebrew it occurs\neight times. If the reader will refer to page 370, he will see that\nthe Hebrew word _bath-haya'nah_, which is translated in the Authorized\nVersion as \"owl,\" ought really to be rendered as \"Ostrich.\" Taking\nthis to be the case, we find that there are several passages in the\nScriptures in which the word has been used in the wrong sense, and\nthat in those places, instead of rendering the word as \"owl,\" we ought\nto read it as \"Ostrich.\"\n\nThe first mention of this bird occurs in Lev. xi. 16, and the parallel\npassage of Deut. xiv., in which the Ostrich is reckoned among the\nunclean birds, without any notice being given of its appearance or\nhabits.\n\nIn the Book of Job, however, we have the Ostrich mentioned with that\npreciseness and fulness of description which is so often the case when\nthe writer of that wonderful poem treats of living creatures.\n\n\"Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers\nunto the ostrich?\n\n\"Who leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in the dust,\n\n\"And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast\nmay break them.\n\n\"She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers:\nher labour is in vain without fear;\n\n\"Because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath He imparted to\nher understanding.\n\n\"What time she lifteth up herself on high, she scorneth the horse and\nhis rider.\" (Job xxxix. 13-19.)\n\nThere is rather a peculiarity in the translation of this passage,\nwherein the word which has been translated as \"peacock\" is now allowed\nto be properly rendered as \"Ostrich,\" while the word which is\ntranslated as \"Ostrich\" ought to have been given as \"feathers.\" The\nmarginal translation gives the last words of ver. 13 in a rather\ndifferent manner, and renders it thus:--\"Gavest thou the goodly wings\nunto the peacocks, or the feathers of the stork and ostrich?\" The\nHebrew Bible renders the next verses as follows:--\n\n\"She would yet leave her eggs on the earth, and warm them in dust; and\nforget that the foot may crush them, or that the beast of the field\nmay break them.\n\n\"She is hardened against her young ones, for those not hers; being\ncareless, her labour is in vain.\"\n\nIn the same Book, chap. xxx., is another passage wherein this bird is\nmentioned. \"I went mourning without the sun: I stood up, and I cried\nin the congregation.\n\n\"I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls,\" or Ostriches, in\nthe marginal and correct reading. The Jewish Bible also translates the\nword as Ostriches, but the word which the Authorized Version renders\nas \"dragons\" it translates as \"jackals.\" Of this point we shall have\nsomething to say on a future page. A somewhat similar passage occurs\nin Isa. xliii. 20: \"The beast of the field shall honour me, the\ndragons and the owls\" (Ostriches in marginal reading), \"because I give\nwaters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to\nMy people, My chosen.\" The Jewish Bible retains the same reading,\nexcept that the word \"dragons\" is given with the mark of doubt.\n\nAccepting, therefore, the rendering of the Hebrew as Ostriches, let us\nsee how far the passages of Scripture agree with the appearance and\nhabits of the bird.\n\nHere I may observe that, although in the Scriptures frequent allusions\nare made to the habits of animals, we are not to look for scientific\nexactness to the Scriptures. Among much that is strictly and\ncompletely true, there are occasional errors, to which a most needless\nattention has been drawn by a certain school of critics, who point to\nthem as invalidating the truth of Scripture in general. The real fact\nis, that they have no bearing whatever on the truth or falsehood of\nthe Scriptural teachings.\n\nThe Scriptures were written at various times, for instruction in\nspiritual and not in temporal matters, and were never intended for\nscientific treatises on astronomy, mathematics, zoology, or any such\nbranch of knowledge. The references which are made to the\nlast-mentioned subject are in no case of a scientific nature, but are\nalways employed by way of metaphor or simile, as the reader must have\nseen in the previous pages. No point of doctrine is taught by them,\nand none depends on them.\n\nThe Spirit which conveyed religious instruction to the people could\nonly use the means that existed, and could no more employ the\nscientific knowledge of the present time than use as metaphors the\ndress, arms, and inventions of the present day. The Scriptures were\nwritten in Eastern lands for Orientals by Orientals, and were\nconsequently adapted to Oriental ideas; and it would be as absurd to\nlook for scientific zoology in the writings of an ancient Oriental, as\nfor descriptions of the printing press, the steam-engine, the\nphotographic camera, or the electric telegraph.\n\nSo, when we remember that only a few years ago the real history of the\nOstrich was unknown to those who had made zoology the study of their\nlives, we cannot wonder that it was also unknown to those who lived\nmany centuries ago, and who had not the least idea of zoology, or any\nkindred science.\n\nStill, even with these drawbacks, it is wonderful how accurate in many\ninstances were the writers of the Scriptures, and the more so when we\nremember the character of the Oriental mind, with its love of\nmetaphor, its disregard of arithmetical precision, and its poetical\nstyle of thought.\n\nWe will now take the passage in Job xxxix. In ver. 13 reference is\nmade to the wings and feathers of the Ostrich. If the reader will\nrefer to page 260, he will see that the feathers of the Ostrich were\nformerly used as the emblem of rank. In this case, they are shown as\nfastened to the heads of the horses, and also in the form of a plume,\nfixed to the end of a staff, and appended to a chariot, as\nemblematical of the princely rank of the occupier. In the ancient\nEgyptian monuments these Ostrich plumes are repeatedly shown, and in\nevery case denote very high rank. These plumes were therefore held in\nhigh estimation at the time in which the Book of Job was written, and\nit is evidently in allusion to this fact that the sacred writer has\nmentioned so prominently the white plumes of the Ostrich.\n\nPassing the next portion of the description, we find that the Ostrich\nis mentioned as a bird that is careless of its eggs, and leaves them\n\"in the earth, and warmeth them in the dust, and forgetteth that the\nfoot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.\"\n\nNow it is true that the Ostrich is often known to take the greatest\ncare of its eggs, the male collecting and sitting on them, and\nwatching them with loving assiduity, and by some persons this fact has\nbeen brought forward as a proof that the writer of the Book of Job was\nmistaken in his statements. A further acquaintance with the habits of\nthe bird tells us, however, that in those parts of the world which\nwere known to the writer of that book the Ostrich does behave in\nprecisely the manner which is described by the sacred writer.\n\nSeveral females lay their eggs in the same nest, if the title of nest\ncan be rightly applied to a mere hollow scooped in the sand, and, at\nleast during the daytime, when the sun is shining, they simply cover\nthe eggs with sand, so as to conceal them from ordinary enemies, and\nleave them to be hatched by the warm sunbeams. They are buried to the\ndepth of about a foot, so that they receive the benefit of a tolerably\nequable warmth. So much, then, for the assertion that the Ostrich\nleaves her eggs \"in the earth, and warmeth them in the dust.\"\n\nWe next come to the statement that she forgets that \"the foot may\ncrush them, or that the wild beast may break them.\" It is evident from\nthe preceding description that eggs which are buried a foot deep in\nthe sand could not be crushed by the foot, even were they of a fragile\ncharacter, instead of being defended by a shell as thick, and nearly\nas hard, as an ordinary earthenware plate. Neither would the wild\nbeast be likely to discover much less to break them.\n\n [Illustration: OSTRICH AND NEST.\n\n \"_Who leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in the\n dust._\"--JOB xxxix. 14.]\n\nA more intimate acquaintance with the history of the Ostrich shows\nthat, even in this particular, the sacred writer was perfectly\ncorrect. Besides the eggs which are intended to be hatched, and which\nare hidden beneath the sand to be hatched, a number of supplementary\neggs are laid which are not meant to be hatched, and are evidently\nintended as food for the young until they are able to forage for\nthemselves. These are left carelessly on the surface of the ground,\nand may easily be crushed by the hoof of a horse, if not by the foot\nof man. We meet, however, with another statement,--namely, that they\nmay be broken by the wild beasts. Here we have reference to another\nfact in the history of the Ostrich. The scattered eggs, to which\nallusion is made, are often eaten, not only by beasts, but also by\nbirds of prey; the former breaking the shells by knocking them against\neach other, and the latter by picking up large stones in their claws,\nrising above the eggs, and dropping the stones on them. The bird would\nlike to seize the egg, rise with it in the air, and drop it on a\nstone, as mentioned on page 337, but the round, smooth surface of the\negg defies the grasp of talons, and, instead of dropping the egg upon\na stone, it is obliged to drop a stone upon the egg.\n\nUp to the present point, therefore, the writer of the Book of Job is\nshown to be perfectly correct in his statements. We will now proceed\nto verse 16: \"She is hardened against her young ones, as though they\nwere not hers.\" Now in the Jewish Bible the passage is rendered rather\ndifferently: \"She is hardened against her young ones, for those not\nhers;\" and, as we shall presently see, the reading perfectly agrees\nwith the character of the Ostrich.\n\nThere has long existed a belief that the Ostrich, contrary to the\ncharacter of all other birds, is careless of her young, neglects them,\nand is even cruel to them. That this notion was shared by the writer\nof the Book of Job is evident from the preceding passage. It also,\nprevailed for at least a thousand years after the Book of Job was\nwritten. See Lam. iv. 3: \"Even the sea monsters draw out the breast,\nthey give suck to their young ones: the daughter of my people is\nbecome cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness.\"\n\nIt is probable that this idea respecting the cruelty of the Ostrich\ntowards its young is derived from the fact that if a flock of\nOstriches be chased, and among them there be some very young birds,\nthe latter are left behind by their parents, and fall a prey to the\nhunters. But, in reality, the Ostrich has no choice in the matter. The\nwide sandy desert affords no place of concealment in which it might\nhide its young. Nature has not furnished it with weapons by means of\nwhich it can fight for them; and consequently it is forced to use the\nonly means of escape by which it can avoid sacrificing its own life,\nas well as the lives of the young.\n\nIt does not, however, leave the young until it has tried, by all means\nin its power, to save them. For example, it sometimes has recourse to\nthe manoeuvre with which we are so familiar in the case of the\nlapwing, and pretends to be wounded or lamed, in order to draw the\nattention of its pursuers, while its young escape in another\ndirection. An instance of this practice is given by Mr. Andersson in\nhis \"Lake Ngami.\" \"When we had proceeded little more than half the\ndistance, and in a part of the plain entirely destitute of vegetation,\nwe discovered a male and female ostrich, with a brood of young ones,\nabout the size of ordinary barn-door fowls. We forthwith dismounted\nfrom our oxen, and gave chase, which proved of no ordinary interest.\n\n\"The moment the parent birds became aware of our intention, they set\noff at full speed--the female leading the way, and the cock, though at\nsome little distance, bringing up the rear of the family party. It was\nvery touching to observe the anxiety the birds evinced for the safety\nof their progeny. Finding that we were quickly gaining upon them, the\nmale at once slackened his pace and diverged somewhat from his course;\nbut, seeing that we were not to be diverted from our purpose, he again\nincreased his speed, and, with wings drooping so as almost to touch\nthe ground, he hovered round us, now in wide circles, and then\ndecreasing the circumference until he came almost within pistol-shot,\nwhen he abruptly threw himself on the ground, and struggled\ndesperately to regain his legs, as it appeared, like a bird that has\nbeen badly wounded.\n\n\"Having previously fired at him, I really thought he was disabled, and\nmade quickly towards him. But this was only a ruse on his part, for,\non my nearer approach, he slowly rose, and began to run in a different\ndirection to that of the female, who by this time was considerably\nahead with her charge.\" Nor is this a solitary instance of the care\nwhich the Ostrich will take of her young. Thunberg mentions that on\none occasion, when he happened to ride near a place where an Ostrich\nwas sitting on the eggs, the bird jumped up and pursued him, evidently\nwith the object of distracting his attention from the eggs. When he\nfaced her, she retreated; but as soon as he turned his horse, she\npursued him afresh.\n\nThe care of the mother for the young is perhaps less needed with the\nOstrich than with most birds. The young are able to run with such\nspeed that ordinary animals are not able to overtake them, and,\nbesides, they are protected by their colour as long as they are\ncomparatively helpless. Their downy plumage harmonizes completely\nwith the sandy and stony ground, even when they run, and when they\ncrouch to the earth, as is their manner when alarmed, even the most\npractised eye can scarcely see them. Mr. Andersson, an experienced\nhunter, states that when the Ostrich chicks were crouching almost\nunder his feet, he had the greatest difficulty in distinguishing their\nforms.\n\nOwing to the great number of the eggs that are laid, the young are\noften very numerous, between thirty and forty chicks sometimes\nbelonging to one brood. In the Ostrich chase which has already been\ndescribed, the brood were eighteen in number, and so great was their\nspeed that, in spite of their youth and diminutive size, Mr. Andersson\nonly succeeded in capturing nine of them after an hour's severe chase.\n\nWe find, therefore, that we must acquit the Ostrich of neglecting its\nyoung, much more of cruelty towards them; and we will now turn to the\nnext charge against the bird, that of stupidity.\n\nIn one sense, the bird certainly may be considered stupid. Like nearly\nall wild creatures which live on large plains, it always runs against\nthe wind, so as to perceive by scent if any enemies are approaching.\nIts nostrils are very sensitive, and can detect a human being at a\nvery great distance. So fastidious is it in this respect, that no\nhunter who knows his business ever attempts to approach the Ostrich\nexcept from leeward. If a nest is found, and the discoverer wishes the\nbirds to continue laying in it, he approaches on the leeward side, and\nrakes out the eggs with a long stick.\n\nThe little Bosjesman, who kills so many of these birds with his tiny\nbow and arrow, makes use of this instinct when he goes to shoot the\nOstrich, disguised in a skin of one of the birds. Should an Ostrich\nattack him, as is sometimes the case, he only shifts his position to\nwindward, so as to allow the birds to catch the scent of a human\nbeing, when they instantly make off in terror.\n\nWhen, therefore, the Ostriches are alarmed, they always run to\nwindward, instinctively knowing that, if an enemy should approach in\nthat direction, their powers of scent will inform them of the danger.\nBeing aware of this habit, the hunters manage so that while one of\nthem goes round by a long detour to frighten the game, the others are\nin waiting at a considerable distance to windward, but well on one\nside, so that no indication of their presence may reach the sensitive\nnostrils of the birds. As soon as the concealed hunters see the\nOstriches fairly settled down to their course, they dash off at right\nangles to the line which the birds are taking, and in this way come\nnear enough to use their weapons. The antelopes of the same country\nhave a similar instinct, and are hunted in precisely the same manner.\n\nThus, then, in one sense the Ostrich may be considered as open to the\ncharge of stupidity, inasmuch as it pursues a course which can be\nanticipated by enemies who would otherwise be unable to overtake it.\nBut it must be remembered that instinct cannot be expected to prove a\nmatch for reason, and that, although its human enemies are able to\noverreach it, no others can do so, the instinct of running against the\nwind serving to guard it from any foe which it is likely to meet in\nthe desert.\n\nWhen captured alive and tamed, it certainly displays no particular\namount of intellect. The Arabs often keep tame Ostriches about their\ntents, the birds being as much accustomed to their quarters as the\nhorses. In all probability they did so in ancient times, and the\nauthor of the Book of Job was likely to be familiar with tame\nOstriches, as well as with the wild bird.\n\nStupidity is probably attributed to the tame bird in consequence of\nthe habit possessed by the Ostrich of picking up and eating substances\nwhich cannot be used as food. For example, it will eat knives, bits of\nbone or metal, and has even been known to swallow bullets hot from the\nmould. On dissecting the digestive organs of an Ostrich, I have found\na large quantity of stones, pieces of brick, and scraps of wood. These\narticles are, however, not intended to serve as food, but simply to\naid digestion, and the bird eats them just as domestic fowls pick up\ngravel, and smaller birds grains of sand. In swallowing them,\ntherefore, the Ostrich does not display any stupidity, but merely\nobeys a natural instinct.\n\nLastly, we come to the speed of the Ostrich: \"What time she lifteth up\nherself on high, she scorneth the horse and his rider.\"\n\nThis statement is literally true. When the Ostrich puts forth its full\nspeed, there is no horse that can catch it in a fair chase. It may be\nkilled by the ruse which has already been described, but an adult\nOstrich can run away from the swiftest horse. When it runs at full\nspeed, it moves its long legs with astonishing rapidity, covering at\neach stride an average of twenty-four feet, a fact from which its rate\nof speed may be deduced. In consequence of this width of stride, and\nthe small impression made in the sand by the two-toed foot, the track\nof a running Ostrich is very obscure. Perhaps no better proof of the\nswiftness of the bird can be given than the extreme value set upon it\nby the Arabs. Although they are bred to the desert as much as the\nOstrich itself, and are mounted on horses whose swiftness and\nendurance are proverbial, they set a very high value on the Ostrich,\nand to have captured one of these birds establishes an Arab's fame as\na hunter.\n\nSometimes the Arabs employ the plan of cutting across the course of\nthe bird, but at others they pursue it in fair chase, training their\nhorses and themselves specially for the occasion. They furnish\nthemselves with a supply of water, and then start in pursuit of the\nfirst flock of Ostriches they find. They take care not to alarm the\nbirds, lest they should put out their full speed and run away out of\nsight, but just keep sufficiently near to force the birds to be\ncontinually on the move. They will sometimes continue this chase for\nseveral days, not allowing their game time to eat or rest, until at\nlast it is so tired that it yields itself an easy prey.\n\nIn Southern Africa, snares are used for taking the Ostrich. They are\nin fact ordinary springes, but of strength suitable to the size of the\nbird. The cord is made fast to a sapling, which is bent down by main\nstrength, and the other end is then formed into a noose and fastened\ndown with a trigger. Sometimes the bird is enticed towards the snare\nby means of a bait, and sometimes it is driven over it by the\nhuntsmen. In either case, as soon as the Ostrich puts its foot within\nthe fatal noose, the trigger is loosed, the sapling is released, and,\nwith a violent jerk, the Ostrich is caught by the leg and suspended in\nthe air.\n\nWhy the flesh of the Ostrich should have been prohibited to the Jews\nis rather a mystery. It is much valued by most natives, though some of\nthe Arab tribes still adhere to the Jewish prohibition, and those\nEuropeans who have tried it pronounce it to be excellent when the bird\nis young and tender, but to be unpleasantly tough when it is old. Mr.\nAndersson says that its flesh resembles that of the zebra, and\nmentions that the fat and blood are in great request, being mixed\ntogether by cutting the throat of the bird, passing a ligature round\nthe neck just below the incision, and then shaking and dragging the\nbird about for some time. Nearly twenty pounds of this substance are\nobtained from a single Ostrich.\n\nThe ancient Romans valued exceedingly the flesh of this bird. We are\ntold that Heliogabalus once had a dish served at his table containing\nsix hundred Ostrich brains, and that another emperor ate a whole\nOstrich at a meal. As an adult Ostrich weighs some twenty-five stone,\nwe may presume that the bird in question was a young one.\n\nThe eggs are most valuable articles of food, both on account of their\nexcellent flavour and their enormous size. It is calculated that one\nOstrich egg contains as much as twenty-five ordinary hen's eggs.\nCooking the Ostrich egg is easily performed. A hole is made in the\nupper part of the egg, and the lower end is set on the fire. A forked\nstick is then introduced into the egg, and twirled between the hands,\nso as to beat up the whole of the interior. Europeans usually add\npepper and salt, and say that this simple mode of cooking produces an\nexcellent omelette.\n\nThe ordinary food of the Ostrich consists of the seeds, buds, and tops\nof various plants. It seems strange, however, that in the deserts,\nwhere there is so little vegetation, the bird should be able to\nprocure sufficient food to maintain its enormous body. Each of the\nspecimens which are kept at the Zoological Gardens eats on an average\na pint of barley, the same quantity of oats, four pounds' weight of\ncabbage, and half a gallon of chaff, beside the buns, bread, and other\narticles of food which are given to them by visitors.\n\nAlthough the Ostrich, like many other inhabitants of the desert, can\nlive for a long time without water, yet it is forced to drink, and\nlike the camel, which it resembles in so many of its ways, drinks\nenormously, taking in the water by a succession of gulps. When the\nweather has been exceptionally hot, the Ostrich visits the\nwater-springs daily, and is so occupied in quenching its thirst that\nit will allow the hunter to come within a very short distance. It\nappears, indeed, to be almost intoxicated with its draught, and, even\nwhen it does take the alarm, it only retreats step by step, instead of\nscudding off with its usually rapid strides.\n\nThe camel-like appearance of the Ostrich has already been mentioned.\nIn the Arabic language the Ostrich is called by a name which signifies\ncamel-bird, and many of the people have an idea that it was originally\na cross between a bird and a camel.\n\nThe cry of the Ostrich is a deep bellow, which, according to\ntravellers in Southern Africa, so resembles the roar of the lion that\neven the practised ears of the natives can scarcely distinguish the\nroar of the animal from the cry of the bird. The resemblance is\nincreased by the fact that both the lion and Ostrich utter their cry\nby night. It is evidently to this cry that the prophet Micah alludes:\n\"Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked: I will\nmake a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls\" (Ostriches\nin marginal reading). The cry of the variety of Ostrich which inhabits\nNorthern Africa is said to bear more resemblance to the lowing of an\nox than the roar of the lion; but as the bird is smaller than its\nsouthern relative, the difference is probably accounted for.\n\nIt has been mentioned that the Ostrich has no weapons wherewith to\nfight for its young; still, though it be destitute of actual weapons,\nsuch as the spur of the gamecock or the beak and talons of the eagle,\nit is not entirely defenceless. Its long and powerful legs can be\nemployed as weapons, and it can kick with such force that a man would\ngo down before the blow, and probably, if struck on the leg or arm,\nhave the limb broken. The blow is never delivered backward, as is the\nkick of the horse, but forward, like that of the kangaroo. The natives\nof the countries where it resides say that it is able to kill by its\nkick the jackal that comes to steal its eggs, and that even the hy\u00e6na\nand the leopard are repelled by the gigantic bird.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BITTERN.\n\n Signification of the word _Kippod_--The Bittern and its general\n appearance--The bird of solitude--Difficulty of detecting the\n Bittern in its haunts--Mudie's description of the Bittern and\n its home--The strange cry of the bird--Superstitions connected\n with it--The Night-raven--Nest of the Bittern--Scarcity of the\n bird at the present day--Food of the Bittern--The bird formerly\n brought to table.\n\n\nIn the account of the hedgehog, page 80, it has been mentioned that\nthe Hebrew word _Kippod_, which has been rendered in the Authorized\nVersion as \"Bittern,\" is in all probability the Syrian hedgehog, and\nthat the Jewish Bible accepts that rendering without even affixing the\nmark of doubt to the word. As, however, some writers on the subject\nstill adhere to the more familiar rendering, a short account will be\ngiven of the Bittern (_Botauris stellaris_).\n\nThe Bittern belongs to the same family as the herons, the cranes, and\nthe storks, and has many of the habits common to them all. It is,\nhowever, essentially a bird of solitude, hating the vicinity of man,\nand living in the most retired spots of marshy ground. As it sits\namong the reeds and rushes, though it is a large bird, it is scarcely\nvisible even to a practised eye, its mottled plumage harmonizing with\nsurrounding objects in such a way that the feathers of the bird can\nscarcely be distinguished from the sticks, stones, and grass tufts\namong which it sits. The ground colour of the plumage is dark buff,\nupon which are sprinkled mottlings and streaks of black, chestnut,\ngrey, and brown. These mottled marks harmonize with the stones and\ntufts of withered grass, while the longitudinal dashes of buff and\nblack on the neck and breast correspond with the sticks and reeds.\n\nIn a similar manner the tiger, though so large an animal, can lie in a\nvery small covert of reeds without being detected, its striped fur\ncorresponding with the reeds themselves and the shadows thrown by\nthem; and the leopard can remain hidden among the boughs of a tree,\nits spotted coat harmonizing with the broken light and shade of the\nfoliage.\n\n [Illustration: THE BITTERN.\n\n \"_I will alto make it a possession for the bittern, and pools for\n water._\"--ISA. xiv. 23.]\n\nThe following powerful description of the Bittern's home is given by\nMudie: \"It is a bird of rude nature, where the land knows no character\nsave that which the untrained working of the elements impresses upon\nit; so that when any locality is in the course of being won to\nusefulness, the bittern is the first to depart, and when any one is\nabandoned, it is the last to return. 'The bittern shall dwell there'\nis the final curse, and implies that the place is to become\nuninhabited and uninhabitable, it hears not the whistle of the\nploughman, nor the sound of the mattock; and the tinkle of the\nsheep-bell, or the lowing of the ox (although the latter bears so much\nresemblance to its own hollow and dismal voice, that it has given\nfoundation to the name), is a signal for it to be gone.\n\n\"Extensive and dingy pools--if moderately upland, so much the\nbetter--which lie in the hollows, catching, like so many traps, the\nlighter and more fertile mould which the rains wash and the winds blow\nfrom the naked heights around, and converting it into harsh and dingy\nvegetation, and the pasture of those loathsome things which wriggle in\nthe ooze, or crawl and swim in the putrid and mantling waters, are the\nhabitation of the bittern.\n\n\"Places which scatter blight and mildew over every herb which is more\ndelicate than a sedge, a carex, or a rush, and consume every wooded\nplant that is taller than the sapless and tasteless cranberry or the\nweeping upland willow; which shed murrain over the quadrupeds, chills\nwhich eat the flesh off their bones, and which, if man ventures there,\nconsume him by putrid fever in the hot and dry season, and shake him\nto pieces with ague when the weather is cold and humid.\n\n\"Places from which the heath and the lichen stand aloof, and where\neven the raven, lover of disease, and battener upon all that expires\nmiserably and exhausted, comes rarely and with more than wonted\ncaution, lest that death which he comes to seal and riot upon in\nothers should unawares come upon himself. The raven loves carrion on\nthe dry and unpoisoning moor, scents it from afar, and hastens to it\nupon his best and boldest wing; but 'the reek o' the rotten fen' is\nloathsome to the sense of even the raven, and it is hunger's last\npinch ere he come nigh to the chosen habitation, the only loved abode,\nof the bittern.\"\n\nSecure in its retreat, the Bittern keeps its place even if a sportsman\nshould pass by the spot on which it crouches. It will not be tempted\nto leave its retreat by noise, or even by stone throwing, for it knows\ninstinctively that the quaking bogland which it selects as its home is\nunsafe for the step of man.\n\nThe very cry of the Bittern adds to this atmosphere of desolation. By\nday the bird is silent, but after the sun has gone down it utters its\nstrange wild cry, a sound which exactly suits the localities in which\nit loves to make its habitation. During part of the year it only emits\na sharp, harsh cry as it rises on the wing, but during the breeding\nseason it utters the cry by which it summons its mate, one of the\nstrangest love-calls that can be imagined. It is something between\nthe neighing of a horse, the bellow of a bull, and a shriek of savage\nlaughter. It is very loud and deep, so that it seems to shake the\nloose and marshy ground. There was formerly an idea that, when the\nBittern uttered this booming cry, it thrust its bill into the soft\nground, and so caused it to shake. In reality, the cry is uttered on\nthe wing, the bird wheeling in a spiral flight, and modulating its\nvoice in accordance with the curves which it describes in the air.\nThis strange sound is only uttered by the male bird.\n\nIn every country inhabited by the Bittern we find that its deep\nsepulchral cry, booming out through the darkness, and heard at an\nimmense distance, has been dreaded as the prophecy of some evil to\ncome. In some parts both of England and Ireland it is known as the\nNight-raven, and under that title is held in the greatest fear.\nAllusion is made to this belief in the well-known passage from\nMiddleton's \"Witch\":--\n\n \"At the Night-raven's dismal voice,\n When others tremble, we rejoice;\n And nimbly, nimbly, dance we still\n To the echoes of a hollow hill.\"\n\nUnder the same title Goldsmith writes of it in his \"Animated Nature.\"\n\"I remember, in the place where I was a boy, with what terror the\nbird's note affected the whole village,--they considered it as the\npresage of some sad event, and generally found or made one to succeed\nit. I do not speak ludicrously, but if any person in the neighbourhood\ndied, they supposed it could not be otherwise, for the night-raven had\nforetold it; but if nobody happened to die, the death of a cow or a\nsheep gave completion of the prophecy.\"\n\nIn some parts of England the Bittern is known by the odd title of\nButter-bump, a fact which was mentioned in the _Zoologist_ many years\nago:--\n\n \"There'll either be rain, or else summat waur,\n When Butter-bump sings upo' Potterie car.\"\n\nAbout Fermanagh, in Ireland, the Bittern is called Bog-bluiter, _i.e._\nBog-bleater, just as the snipe is termed the Heather-bluiter.\n\nLike most of the long-legged wading birds, the Bittern is able to\nchange its shape, and apparently to alter its size, in an astonishing\nmanner. When it is walking over the ground, with head erect and eye\nglanced vigilantly at surrounding objects, it looks a large, bold,\nvigorous, and active bird. Next minute it will sink its head in its\nshoulders, so that the long beak seems to project from them, and the\nneck totally disappears, the feathers enveloping each other as\nperfectly and smoothly as if it never had had a neck. In this attitude\nit will stand for an hour at a time on one leg, with the other drawn\nclose to its body, looking as dull, inert, and sluggish a bird as can\nwell be imagined, and reduced apparently to one half of its former\nsize. The Bittern is represented in one of its extraordinary attitudes\non the plate which illustrates the cormorant.\n\nThe nest of the Bittern is placed on the ground, and near the water,\nthough the bird always takes care to build it on an elevated spot\nwhich will not be flooded if the water should rise by reason of a\nsevere rain. There is, however, but little reason for the Bittern to\nfear a flood, as at the time of year which is chosen, for\nnest-building the floods are generally out, and the water higher than\nis likely to be the case for the rest of the year. The materials of\nthe nest are found in marshes, and consist of leaves, reeds, and\nrushes.\n\nIt will be seen from the foregoing account, that if the word _Kippod_\nbe translated as \"Bittern,\" the imagery connected with it holds good,\nand that no more powerful figure could be imagined for the desolation\nof Babylon than the prophecy, \"I will make it a possession for the\nbittern, and pools of water\" (Isa. xiv. 23).\n\n [Illustration: THE CORMORANT.\n\n \"But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it.\"--ISA. xxxiv. 11.]\n\nThough once plentiful in England, the Bittern is now very scarce, and\nthere are few who have seen it in its native haunts. Formerly, when\nswamps and marshes abounded, the Bittern abounded in proportion, but\ndrainage and cultivation and railways have fairly driven the Bittern\nout of the country, and in a few years it will be as completely\nextinct in England as the bustard or the eagle. Even the great marshes\nof Essex are being reclaimed and rendered unfit for the occupation of\nthe bird; and, from the upper part of the house where this account is\nwritten, I can see with the aid of the telescope cornfields, and\npasture-lands, and barns, and ricks, and roads, diversifying the wide\nexpanses which were once covered with brackish water at every flow of\nthe tide, and at the ebb only left as quagmires through which the foot\nof man could not pass, and on which grew the rough and scanty\nherbage that flourishes under conditions that would kill almost\nany other vegetation.\n\nNo longer can the Bittern find a home there. Deep ditches intersect\neach other at short intervals, into which the moisture of the really\nrich soil is drained, and the water that once stood in stagnant pools\nwhich the Bittern loved is conducted into them, and discharged into\nthe river at the ebb tide. By the abstraction of the moisture, the\nwhole country has been lowered more than a foot, and, together with\nthe stagnant pools, the Bittern has vanished never more to return. And\nhere it may be mentioned that, although the Bittern inhabits none but\ndesolate places, it only selects those which contain capabilities of\ncultivation. So, if the boom of the Bittern be heard, it may be\naccepted as deciding two things--firstly, that the ground is utterly\ndeserted by man, and uncultivated; and secondly, that it ought to be\noccupied by him, and brought into cultivation.\n\nAt the present day, the Bittern is very plentiful in the swampy\ngrounds which edge the Tigris, just as it used to be in the marshes\nwhich border the Thames. Should the time come when London will have\npassed away as completely as the great cities of old, and the banks of\nthe Thames lie as desolate as those of the Tigris, the Bittern will\nreassume its sway, and its deep booming note will again be heard\nthrough the stillness of night.\n\nAs if to add to the general effect of its character, it is essentially\na solitary bird, and in this characteristic entirely unlike its\nrelatives the heron and the stork, which are peculiarly sociable, and\nlove to gather themselves together in multitudes. But the Bittern is\nnever found except alone, or at the most accompanied for a time by its\nmate and one or two young ones.\n\nThe localities in which it resides are sufficient evidence of the\nnature of its food. Frogs appear to be its favourite diet, but it also\nfeeds on various fish, insects, molluscs, worms, and similar\ncreatures. Dull and apathetic as it appears to be, it can display\nsufficient energy to capture tolerably large fish. Though the Bittern\nis only about two feet in total length, one of these birds was killed,\nin the stomach of which were found one perfect rudd eight inches in\nlength and two in depth, together with the remains of another fish, of\na full-grown frog, and of an aquatic insect. In another instance, a\nBittern had contrived to swallow an eel as long as itself; while in\nmany cases the remains of five or six full-grown frogs have been\nfound in the interior of the bird, some just swallowed, and others in\nvarious stages of digestion.\n\nIn former times the Bittern was used as food in England, and was\nconsidered one of the delicacies of a rich man's table. Partly on\naccount of its scarcity, and partly on account of a popular prejudice,\nit is never eaten at the present day, and those few specimens which\nare occasionally exposed for sale are merely purchased for the sake of\ntheir plumage. The flesh of the Bittern justifies the predilection\nwhich was formerly exhibited for it, as it is tender, well-flavoured,\nand fat.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HERON.\n\n The Heron mentioned as an unclean bird--The Heron used for food\n in England, and considered as a delicacy--Sociable character of\n the bird, and its mode of feeding--Its enormous appetite--How\n the Heron fights--Ancient falconry--Nesting of the Heron--The\n papyrus marshes and their dangers--Description of the\n papyrus--Vessels of bulrushes--The Egret and its beautiful\n plumage--Uses of the train feathers.\n\n\nThe name of the Heron is only mentioned twice in the\nScriptures--namely, in the two parallel passages of Lev. xi. 19 and\nDeut. xiv. 18; in both of which places the Heron is ranked among the\nunclean birds that might not be eaten.\n\nIn some of the cases where beasts or birds are prohibited as food, the\nprohibition seems scarcely needed. To us of the present day this seems\nto be the case with the Heron, as it is never brought to table. The\nreason for this disuse of the Heron as food is not that it is unfit\nfor the table, but that it has become so scarce by the spread of\ncultivation and house-building, that it has been gradually abandoned\nas a practically unattainable article of diet. The flesh of the Heron,\nlike that of the bittern, is remarkably excellent, and in the former\ndays, when it was comparatively plentiful, and falconry was the\nordinary amusement of the rich, the Heron formed a very important dish\nat every great banquet.\n\n [Illustration: THE HERON.\n\n \"_These are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls\n ... the stork, the heron after her kind._\"--DEUT. xi. 13, 19.]\n\nThe bird, however, must be eaten when young. A gentleman who liked to\ntry experiments for himself in the matter of food, found that, if\nyoung Herons were properly cooked, they formed a most excellent dish,\nequal, in his opinion, to grouse. Wishing to have his own judgment\nconfirmed by that of others, he had several of them trussed and\ndressed like wild geese, and served up at table under that name. The\nguests approved greatly of the bird, and compared it to hare, the\nresemblance being further increased by the dark colour of the flesh.\nThere was not the slightest fishy flavour about the bird. This,\nhowever, is apt to be found in the older birds, but can be removed by\nburying them in the earth for several days, just as is done with the\nsolan goose and one or two other sea-birds.\n\nSeveral species of Heron inhabit Palestine, of which the common Heron\n(_Ardea cinerea_), with which we are so familiar in England, is\nperhaps the most plentiful; and it is to this bird that the\nprohibition chiefly extends. But there were several other species of\nthe bird, as is implied by the language of the law, which prohibited\nthe Heron \"after her kind.\" The Egrets are probably included in this\ncategory; and, if the word _kippod_ be really the hedgehog, it is\ntolerably certain that the bittern was included under the general term\nAn\u00e2phah, which is given in the Authorized Version as Heron. The Jewish\nBible follows the same reading, but affixes the mark of doubt to the\nword.\n\nThe abundance of birds belonging to the Heron tribe is well shown by\nsome of the paintings and carvings on Egyptian monuments, in which\nvarious species of Herons and other water-birds are depicted as living\namong the papyrus reeds, exactly the locality in which they are most\nplentiful at the present day.\n\nUnlike the bittern, the Heron is a most sociable bird, and loves not\nonly to live, but even to feed, in company with others of its own\nspecies. In Mr. Waterton's grounds, near Walton, I have watched the\nHerons feeding in close proximity to each other. The birds were fond\nof wading stealthily along the edge of the lake until they came to a\nsuitable spot, where they would stand immersed in the water up to the\nthighs, waiting patiently for their prey. They stood as still as if\nthey were carved out of wood, the ripples of the lake reflected on\ntheir plumage as the breeze ruffled the surface of the water. Suddenly\nthere would be a quick dive of the beak, either among the reeds or in\nthe water, and each stroke signified that the Heron had caught its\nprey.\n\nFrogs and small fishes are the usual food of the Heron, though it\noften grapples with larger prey, having been seen to capture an eel of\nconsiderable size in its beak. Under such circumstances it leaves the\nwater, with the fish in its mouth, and beats it violently against a\nstone so as to kill it. Now and then the bird is vanquished in the\nstruggle by the fish, several instances being known in which an eel,\nin its endeavours to escape, has twisted itself so tightly round the\nneck of the bird that both have been found lying dead on the shore.\n\nIn one such case the Heron's beak had struck through the eyes of the\neel, so that the bird could not disengage itself. In another the Heron\nhad tried to swallow an eel which was much too large for it, and had\nbeen nearly choked by its meal. The eel must necessarily have been a\nvery large one, as the Heron has a wonderful capacity for devouring\nfish. Even when quite young, it can swallow a fish as large as a\nherring, and when it is full grown it will eat four or five large\nherrings at a meal.\n\nNow when we remember that an Englishman of average appetite finds one\nherring to form a very sufficient breakfast, we can easily imagine\nwhat must be the digestive power of a bird which, though very inferior\nto man in point of bulk, can eat four times as much at a meal. Even\nthough the fish be much larger in diameter than the neck of the bird,\nthe Heron can swallow it as easily as a small snake swallows a large\nfrog. The neck merely seems to expand as if it were made of\nIndiarubber, the fish slips down, and the bird is ready for another.\n\nGenerally the Herons feed after sunset, but I have frequently seen\nthem busily engaged in catching their prey in full daylight, when the\nsunbeams were playing in the water so as to produce the beautiful\nrippling effect on the Heron's plumage which has already been\nmentioned.\n\nThe Heron does not restrict itself to fishes or reptiles, but, like\nthe bittern, feeds on almost any kind of aquatic animal which comes\nwithin its reach. When it lives near tidal rivers, it feeds largely on\nthe shrimps, prawns, green crabs, and various other crustacea; and\nwhen it lives far inland, it still makes prey of the fresh-water\nshrimps, the water-beetles, and the boat-flies, and similar aquatic\ncreatures. In fact, it acts much after the fashion of the lions,\ntigers, and leopards, which put up with locusts and beetles when they\ncan find no larger prey.\n\nThe long beak of the Heron is not merely an instrument by which it can\nobtain food, but is also a weapon of considerable power. When\nattacked, it aims a blow at the eye of its opponent, and makes the\nstroke with such rapidity that the foe is generally blinded before\nperceiving the danger. When domesticated, it has been known to keep\npossession of the enclosure in which it lived, and soon to drive away\ndogs by the power of its beak. When it is young, it is quite helpless,\nits very long legs being unable to support its body, which is entirely\nbare of plumage, and has a very unprepossessing appearance.\n\nThe flight of the Heron is very powerful, its wings being very large\nin proportion to its slender body. Sometimes the bird takes to\nascending in a spiral line, and then the flight is as beautiful as it\nis strong. When chased by the falcon it mostly ascends in this manner,\neach of the two birds trying to rise above the other.\n\nThe nest of the Heron is always made on the top of some lofty tree,\nwhenever the bird builds in places where trees can be found; and as\nthe bird is an eminently sociable one, a single nest is very seldom\nfound, the Heron being as fond of society as the rook. In England the\nheronries are invariably found in clumps of trees, the nests of the\nbirds being quite close together. In some parts of Palestine, however,\nwhere trees are very scarce, the Heron is obliged to choose some other\nlocality for its nest, and in that case prefers the great thickets of\npapyrus reeds which are found in the marshes, and which are even more\ninaccessible than the tops of trees.\n\nOne of these marshes is well described by Mr. Tristram in his \"Land of\nIsrael.\" \"The whole marsh is marked in the map as impassable; and most\ntruly it is so. I never anywhere have met with a swamp so vast and\nutterly impenetrable. First there is an ordinary bog, which takes one\nup to one's knees in water; then, after half a mile, a belt of deeper\nswamp, where the yellow water lily (_Nuphar lutea_) flourishes; then a\nbelt of tall reeds; the open water covered with white water-lily\n(_Nymph\u00e6a alba_); and beyond again an impenetrable wilderness of\npapyrus (_Papyrus antiquorum_), in the beautiful forest of which Dr.\nThomson has not recognised the celebrated material of Egypt, though he\nhas well described it under its Arabic name, 'babeer' (\"Land and\nBook,\" 259).\n\n\"The papyrus extends right across to the east side. A false step off\nits roots will take the intruder over head in suffocating peat-mud. We\nspent a long time in attempting to effect an entrance, and at last\ngave it up, satisfied that the marsh birds were not to be had. In\nfact, the whole is simply a floating bog of several miles square; a\nvery thin crust of vegetation covers an unknown depth of water; and,\nif the explorer breaks through this, suffocation is imminent. Some of\nthe Arabs, who were tilling the plain for cotton, assured us that even\na wild boar never got through it. We shot two bitterns, but in\nendeavouring to retrieve them I slipped from the root on which I was\nstanding, and was drawn down in a moment, only saving myself from\ndrowning by my gun, which had providentially caught across a papyrus\nstem.\"\n\nIt may here be mentioned that the bulrush of Scripture is undoubtedly\nthe papyrus. The ark or basket of bulrushes, lined with slime and\npitch, in which Moses was laid, was made of the papyrus, which at the\npresent day is used for the manufacture of baskets, mats, sandals, and\nfor the thatching of houses. Many tribes which inhabit the banks of\nthe Nile make simple boats, or rather rafts, of the papyrus, which\nthey cut and tie in bundles; and it is worthy of notice that the\nAustralian native makes a reed boat in almost exactly the same manner.\n\nCompare Is. xviii. 1, 2: \"Woe to the land shadowing with wings, which\nis beyond the rivers of Ethiopia.\n\n\"That sendeth ambassadors by the sea, even in vessels of bulrushes.\"\nDid we not know that vessels are actually made of bulrushes at the\npresent day, a custom which has survived from very ancient times, we\nmight find a difficulty in understanding this passage, while the\nmeaning is intelligible enough when it is viewed by the light of the\nknowledge that the Ethiopian of the present day takes gold, and ivory,\nand other merchandise down the Nile in his boat of papyrus (or\nbulrush) reeds tied together.\n\nThe papyrus runs from ten to fifteen or sixteen feet in height, so\nthat the Herons are at no loss for suitable spots whereon to place\ntheir nests. The name \"papyrus,\" from which our word \"paper\" is\nderived, is nothing more than a Latinized form of the old Arabic name\n\"babeer.\" It is never found except in muddy and swampy places such as\nthose which have already been mentioned. Thus we have in Job viii. 11\na reference to this quality of the papyrus: \"Can the rush grow up\nwithout mire? can the flag grow without water?\"\n\n\nThe Egrets, which are probably included under the generic title of\nAn\u00e2phah, are birds of passage, and at the proper season are plentiful\nin Palestine. These pretty birds much resemble the heron in general\nform, and in general habits both birds are very much alike, haunting\nthe marshes and edges of lakes and streams, and feeding upon the frogs\nand other inhabitants of the water. In countries where rice is\ncultivated, the Egret may generally be seen in the artificial swamps\nin which that plant is sown. The colour of the Egret is pure white,\nwith the exception of the train. This consists of a great number of\nlong slender feathers of a delicate straw colour. Like those which\nform the train of the peacock, they fall over the feathers of the\ntail, and entirely conceal them. The train of the Egret is highly\nvalued in the East, brushes being made of them wherewith flies can be\ndriven away, or delicate articles dusted. As the bird is a very shy\nand wary one, these feathers cannot be easily procured, especially as\nthey do not make their appearance until the bird has reached its third\nyear, and had time to learn the signs of approaching danger. The Egret\nis rather larger than the heron, a full-grown specimen measuring about\nfour feet in length, whereas the heron is scarcely more than a yard in\ntotal length. The train-feathers of the Egret add, however, to the\napparent size of the bird.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CRANE.\n\n Various passages in which the Crane is mentioned--Its migratory\n habits, and loud voice--Geographical range of the Crane--The\n bird once plentiful in the fen districts of England--Its\n favourite roosting-places--Size of the Crane, and measurement of\n the wings--The Crane once used as food--Plumes of the Crane and\n their use--Structure of the vocal organs--Nest and eggs of the\n Crane.\n\n\nIn the description of the dove and the swallow two passages have been\nquoted in which the name of the CRANE is mentioned, one referring to\nits voice, and the other to its migratory instinct. The first passage\noccurs in Isa. xxxviii. 14: \"Like a crane or swallow, so did I\nchatter;\" and the other in Jer. viii. 7: \"The turtle and the crane and\nthe swallow observe the time of their coming.\"\n\nIt is rather remarkable that in both these cases the word \"Crane\" is\nused in connexion with the swallow, or rather the swift, and that in\nboth instances the names of the birds should have been interchanged.\nIf we refer to the original of these passages, we shall find that the\nformer of them would run thus, \"Like a _sis_ or an _agur_\" and the\nlatter thus, \"The turtle and the _sis_ and the _agur_.\" That in these\npassages the interpretation of the words _sis_ and _agur_ have been\ninterchanged has already been mentioned, and, as the former has been\ndescribed under the name of swallow or swift, we shall now treat of\nthe latter under the title of Crane.\n\n [Illustration: THE CRANE.\n\n \"_Like a crane ... so did I chatter._\"--ISA. xxxviii. 14.]\n\nThe species here mentioned is the common Crane (_Grus cinerea_), a\nbird which has a very wide range, and has occasionally made its\nappearance in one or two parts of Great Britain. In Ireland it is\nthought to be common, but in that country the word Crane is simply a\npopular misnomer for the heron. As is the case with many wild birds,\nespecially those of the larger kinds, the Crane appears to have been a\nmuch more frequent visitor of our shores than can be the case in the\npresent day, when the land is thickly populated, and not a strange\nbird can show itself without running the risk of being shot.\n\nAs might be imagined, the Cranes favoured the great fen-districts of\nEngland, especially those of Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire, where it\nused to be found in large flocks. That in those days it bred in\nEngland is evident from Acts of Parliament in the reigns of Henry\nVIII. and Edward VI., in which reigns the taking of a Crane's egg was\npunished with a fine of twenty pence, in those days a considerable\nsum, being nearly four times the average daily wages of a working man.\nA small flock of Cranes was seen in Zetland in 1807, but at the\npresent time drainage, cultivation, and house-building have as\neffectually extirpated the gregarious Crane as the solitary bittern.\n\nThe Crane performs its annual migrations in company, vast flocks of\nmany thousand individuals passing like great clouds at an immense\nheight, whence their trumpet-like cry is audible for a great distance\nround, and attracts the ear if not the eye to them. Thus we have at a\nglance both the characteristics to which reference is made in the\nScriptures, namely, the noisy cry and the habit of migration.\n\nIt is a very gregarious bird, associating with its comrades in flocks,\njust as do the starlings and rooks of our own country, and, like these\nbirds, has favourite roosting-places in which it passes the night.\nWhen evening approaches, the Cranes may be seen in large flocks\npassing to their roosting-places, and, on account of their great size,\nhaving a very strange effect. A fair-sized Crane will measure seven\nfeet across the expanded wings, so that even a solitary bird has a\nvery imposing effect when flying, while that of a large flock of\nCranes on the wing is simply magnificent.\n\nThe spots which the Crane selects for its roosting-places are\ngenerally of the same character. Being in some respects a wary bird,\nthough it is curiously indifferent in others, it will not roost in any\nplace near bushes, rocks, or other spots which might serve to conceal\nan enemy. The locality most favoured by the Crane is a large, smooth,\nsloping bank, far from any spot wherein an enemy may be concealed. The\nbirds keep a careful watch during the night, and it is impossible for\nany foe to approach them without being discovered. The Crane is noisy\non the wing, and, whether it be soaring high over head on its long\nmigratory journeys, or be merely flying at dusk to its roosting-place,\nit continually utters its loud, clangorous cry.\n\nThe food of the Crane is much like that of the heron, but in addition\nto the frogs, fish, worms, and insects, it eats vegetable substances.\nSometimes it is apt to get into cultivated grounds, and then does much\ndamage to the crops, pecking up the ground with its long beak, partly\nfor the sake of the worms, grubs, and other creatures, and partly for\nthe sake of the sprouting seeds.\n\nAlthough by reason of its scarcity the Crane has been abandoned as\nfood, its flesh is really excellent, and in former days was valued\nvery highly, and was looked upon much in the same light as grouse or\nblackcock by ourselves at the present day. The two facts, that it was\nonce comparatively plentiful and that it was highly valued for the\ntable, are shown by an old record of the banquet following the\nenthronization of an Archbishop of Canterbury, at which two hundred\nand four Cranes were served at table. Even in those days the bird was\na very valuable one, the average cost exceeding three shillings, so\nthat none but the wealthy could indulge in such a luxury.\n\nLike the egret, the Crane is remarkable for the flowing plumes of the\nback, which fall over the tail feathers, and form a train. These\nfeathers are much used as plumes, both for purposes of dress and as\nbrushes or flappers wherewith to drive off the flies. By reason of\nthis conformation, some systematic zoologists have thought that it has\nsome affinity to the ostrich, the rhoea, and similar birds, and that\nthe resemblance is strengthened by the structure of the digestive\norgans, which are suited to vegetable as well as animal substances,\nthe stomach being strong and muscular.\n\nThe peculiar voice of the Crane, which it is so fond of using, and to\nwhich reference is made in the Scriptures, is caused by a peculiar\nstructure of the windpipe, which is exceedingly long, and, instead of\ngoing straight to the lungs, undergoes several convolutions about the\nbreast-bone, and then proceeds to the lungs.\n\nThe Crane makes its nest on low ground, generally among osiers or\nreeds, and it lays only two eggs, pale olive in colour, dashed\nprofusely with black and brown streaks.\n\n\n\n\nTHE STORK.\n\n Signification of the Hebrew word _Chasidah_--Various passages in\n which it is mentioned--The Chasidah therefore a large,\n wide-winged, migratory bird--Its identification with the\n Stork--Derivation of its Hebrew name--The Stork always\n protected--Uses of the tail--Its mode of quartering the ground\n in search of food--Migratory habits of the Stork--Nesting of the\n bird, and its favourite localities--The fir-trees of\n Palestine--Love of the Stork for its young.\n\n\nIn the Old Testament there are several passages wherein is mentioned\nthe word _Chasidah_. We will take these passages in their order. In\nthe first place, we find that the Chasidah is enumerated in Lev. xi.\n19 among the unclean creatures: \"And the stork, the heron after her\nkind, and the lapwing, and the bat.\" The parallel passage in Deut.\nxiv. 18 has precisely the same words. Next we have the passage in Job\nxxxix. 13: \"Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or the\nfeathers of the chasidah and ostrich?\" (marginal reading.) Next we\ncome to Ps. civ. 16, 17: \"The trees of the Lord are full of sap; the\ncedars of Lebanon, which He hath planted.\n\n\"Where the birds make their nests: as for the chasidah, the fir-trees\nare her house.\"\n\nPassing to the prophets, we find that Jeremiah uses the same word\n(viii. 7): \"Yea, the chasidah in the heaven knoweth her appointed\ntimes; and the turtle and the crane and the swallow observe the time\nof their coming; but my people know not the judgment of the Lord.\"\n\nThe last mention of the word occurs in Zech. v. 9: \"Then lifted I up\nmine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the\nwind was in their wings; (for they had wings like the wings of a\nchasidah;) and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the\nheaven.\"\n\nWe learn from these passages that, in the first place, the Chasidah\nwas certainly a bird, as it is mentioned in connexion with other\nbirds, and is said to have wings and feathers. Our next business is to\nfind out what particular bird is meant by the Chasidah. It is evident\nfrom the passage in Jeremiah that it is a migratory bird; from that in\nthe Psalms, that it builds its nest upon a fir-tree; and from those in\nJob and Zechariah, that it is a large-winged bird. These details very\nmuch narrow the question, which is still further limited by the fact\nthat we have already identified the crane and the heron.\n\nThe Authorized Version invariably renders the word Chasidah as\n\"Stork,\" and is undoubtedly right; though the Septuagint has no less\nthan four different translations, reading it as \"heron\" in one place,\n\"pelican\" in another, \"hoopoe\" in another, and in the fourth instance\nleaving the word untranslated, but Gr\u00e6cized into the form of _asida_.\nIt would have been better if the last-mentioned plan had been followed\nthroughout.\n\nThere is, however, no doubt that the Authorized Version is perfectly\ncorrect; and it is followed by the Jewish Bible, in which no mark of\ndoubt is affixed to the word.\n\nIn Buxtorf's Lexicon there is a curious derivation of the word. He\nsays that the word _Chasidah_ is derived from _chesed_, a word that\nsignifies benevolence. This word is used in many familiar passages;\nsuch as, \"unworthy of all the _benefits_,\" \"according to the multitude\nof Thy _mercies_,\" \"exercising _pity_,\" and so forth.\n\nAccording to some writers, the name was given to the Stork because it\nwas supposed to be a bird remarkable for its filial piety; \"for the\nstorks in their turn support their parents in their old age: they\nallow them to rest their necks on their bodies during migration, and,\nif the elders are tired, the young ones take them on their backs.\"\nAccording to others, the name is given to the Stork because it\nexercises kindness towards its companions in bringing them food; but\nin all cases the derivation of the word is acknowledged to be the\nsame.\n\nPartly in consequence of this idea, which is a very old and almost\nuniversal one, and partly on account of the great services rendered by\nthe bird in clearing the ground of snakes, insects, and garbage, the\nStork has always been protected through the East, as it is to the\npresent day in several parts of Europe. The slaughter of a Stork, or\neven the destruction of its eggs, would be punished with a heavy fine;\nand in consequence of the immunity which it enjoys, it loves to haunt\nthe habitations of mankind.\n\nIn many of the Continental towns, where sanitary regulations are not\nenforced, the Stork serves the purpose of a scavenger, and may be seen\nwalking about the market-place, waiting for the offal of fish, fowls,\nand the like, which are simply thrown on the ground for the Storks to\neat. In Eastern lands the Stork enjoys similar privileges, and we may\ninfer that the bird was perfectly familiar both to the writers of the\nvarious Scriptural books in which it was mentioned, and to the people\nfor whom these books were intended.\n\nWhen they settle upon a tract of ground, the Storks divide it among\nthemselves in a manner that seems to have a sort of system in it,\nspreading themselves over it with wonderful regularity, each bird\nappearing to take possession of a definite amount of ground. By this\nmode of proceeding, the ground is rapidly cleared of all vermin; the\nStorks examining their allotted space with the keenest scrutiny, and\ndevouring every reptile, mouse, worm, grub, or insect that they can\nfind on it. Sometimes they will spread themselves in this manner over\na vast extent of country, arriving suddenly, remaining for several\nmonths, and departing without giving any sign of their intention to\nmove.\n\nThe wings of the Stork, which are mentioned in Holy Writ, are very\nconspicuous, and are well calculated to strike an imaginative mind.\nThe general colour of the bird is white, while the quill feathers of\nthe wings are black; so that the effect of the spread wings is very\nstriking, an adult bird measuring about seven feet across, when\nflying. As the body, large though it may be, is comparatively light\nwhen compared with the extent of wing, the flight is both lofty and\nsustained, the bird flying a very great height, and, when migrating,\nis literally the \"stork in the heavens.\"\n\nNext we come to the migratory habits of the Stork.\n\nLike the swallow, the Stork resorts year after year to the same\nspots; and when it has once fixed on a locality for its nest, that\nplace will be assuredly taken as regularly as the breeding-season\ncomes round. The same pair are sure to return to their well-known\nhome, notwithstanding the vast distances over which they pass, and the\nmany lands in which they sojourn. Should one of the pair die, the\nother finds a mate in a very short time, and thus the same home is\nkept up by successive generations of Storks, much as among men one\nancestral mansion is inhabited by a series of members of the same\nfamily.\n\nSo well is this known, that when a pair of Storks have made their nest\nin a human habitation their return is always expected, and when they\narrive the absentees are welcomed on all sides. In many countries\nbreeding-places are specially provided for the Storks; and when one of\nthem is occupied for the first time, the owner of the house looks upon\nit as a fortunate omen.\n\nThe localities chosen by the Stork for its nest vary according to the\nsurrounding conditions. The foundation which a Stork requires is a\nfirm platform, the more elevated the better, but the bird seems to\ncare little whether this platform be on rocks, buildings, or trees.\nIf, for example, it builds its nest in craggy places, far from the\nhabitations of man, it selects some flat ledge for the purpose,\npreferring those that are at the extreme tops of the rocks. The summit\nof a natural pinnacle is a favourite spot with the Stork.\n\nIn many cases the Stork breeds among old ruins, and under such\ncircumstances it is fond of building its nest on the tops of pillars\nor towers, the summits of arches, and similar localities. When it\ntakes up its abode among mankind, it generally selects the\nbreeding-places which have been built for it by those who know its\ntaste, but it frequently chooses the top of a chimney, or some such\nlocality.\n\nSometimes, however, it is obliged to build in spots where it can find\nneither rocks nor buildings, and in such cases it builds on trees,\nand, like the heron, is sociable in its nesting, a whole community\nresiding in a clump of trees. It is not very particular about the kind\nof tree, provided that it be tolerably tall, and strong enough to bear\nthe weight of its enormous nest; and the reader will at once see that\nthe fir-trees are peculiarly fitted to be the houses for the Stork.\n\nAs is the case with so many zoological words, botanical names seem to\nbe frequently used in a collective sense by the scriptural writers,\nseveral species being signified by a single name. Thus the word which\nis in some cases translated as \"fir,\" is in some rendered as\n\"pine-tree,\" in others as \"juniper,\" and in others as \"cypress.\" In\nthe present case it is undoubtedly translated rightly, though in the\nJewish Bible it is rendered as \"cypress:\" \"The trees of the Eternal\nsatisfy themselves, the cedars of Lebanon which He hath planted; where\nbirds make their nests: as for the stork, cypresses are its house.\"\n\nThe particular species of fir-tree to which the Psalmist alludes is\nprobably the Aleppo pine (_Pinus halepensis_), which comes next to the\ngreat cedars of Lebanon in point of size. It was this tree that\nfurnished the timber and planks for Solomon's temple and palace, a\ntimber which was evidently held in the greatest estimation. This tree\nfulfils all the conditions which a Stork would require in\nnest-building. It is lofty, and its boughs are sufficiently horizontal\nto form a platform for the nest, and strong enough to sustain it. On\naccount of its value, and the reckless manner in which it has been cut\ndown without new plantations being formed, the Aleppo pine has\nvanished from many parts of Palestine wherein it was formerly common,\nand would afford a dwelling-place for the Stork.\n\nThere are, however, several other species of fir which are common in\nvarious parts of the country, each species flourishing in the soil\nbest suited to it, so that the Stork would never be at a loss to find\na nesting-place in a country which furnished so many trees suitable to\nits purposes.\n\nAs may be expected from the localities chosen by the Stork for its\nbreeding-place, its nest is very large and heavy. It is constructed\nwith very little skill, and is scarcely more than a huge quantity of\nsticks, reeds, and similar substances, heaped together, and having in\nthe middle a slight depression in which the eggs are laid. These eggs\nare usually three, or perhaps four in number, and now and then a fifth\nis seen, and are of a very pale buff or cream colour.\n\n [Illustration: THE STORK.\n\n \"As for the stork, the fir-trees are her house.\"--PS. civ. 17.]\n\nAs is the case with the heron, the young of the Stork are quite\nhelpless when hatched, and are most ungainly little beings, with their\nlong legs doubled under them, unable to sustain their round and almost\nnaked bodies, while their large beaks are ever gaping for food.\nThose of my readers who have had young birds of any kind must\nhave noticed the extremely grotesque appearance which they\npossess when they hold up their heads and cry for food, with their\nbills open to an almost incredible extent. In such birds as the Stork,\nthe heron, and others of the tribe, the grotesque appearance is\nexaggerated in proportion to the length and gape of the bill.\n\nThe Stork is noted for being a peculiarly kind and loving parent to\nits young, in that point fully deserving the derivation of its Hebrew\nname, though its love manifests itself towards the young, and not\ntowards the parent.\n\nThe Rev. H. B. Tristram mentions from personal experience an instance\nof the watchful care exercised by the Stork over its young. \"The\nwriter was once in camp near an old ruined tower in the plains of\nZana, south of the Atlas, where a pair of storks had their nest. The\nfour young might often be seen from a little distance, surveying the\nprospect from their lonely height, but whenever any of the human party\nhappened to stroll near the tower, one of the old storks, invisible\nbefore, would instantly appear, and, lighting on the nest, put its\nfeet gently on the necks of all the young, so as to hold them down out\nof sight till the stranger had passed, snapping its bill meanwhile,\nand assuming a grotesque air of indifference, as unconscious of there\nbeing anything under its charge.\" (Smith's \"Dict. Bible,\" vol. iii. p.\n1384.)\n\nThe snapping noise which is here mentioned is the only sound produced\nby the Stork, which is an absolutely silent bird, as far as voice is\nconcerned.\n\n\nThere is another species of Stork found in Palestine, to which the\nfir-trees are especially a home. This is the Black Stork (_Ciconia\nnigra_), which in some parts of the country is even more plentiful\nthan its white relative, which it resembles in almost every\nparticular, except that it has a dark head and back, the feathers\nbeing glossed with purple and green like those of the magpie. This\nspecies, which is undoubtedly included in the Hebrew word _chasidah_,\nalways makes its nest on trees whenever it can find them, and in some\nof the more densely wooded parts of Palestine is in consequence\nplentiful, placing its nest in the deepest parts of the forests. When\nit cannot obtain trees, it will build its nest on rocky ledges. It\nlays two or three eggs of a greenish white colour.\n\nLike the preceding species, the Black Stork is easily domesticated.\nColonel Montague kept one which was very tame, and would follow its\nkeeper like a dog. Its tameness enabled its proceedings to be closely\nwatched, and its mode of feeding was thereby investigated. It was fond\nof examining the rank grass and mud for food, and while doing so\nalways kept its bill a little open, so as to pounce down at once on\nany insect or reptile that it might disturb.\n\nEels were its favourite food, and it was such an adept at catching\nthem that it was never seen to miss one, no matter how small or quick\nit might be. As soon as it had caught one of these active fish, it\nwent to some dry place, and then disabled its prey by shaking and\nbeating it against the ground before swallowing it, whereas many birds\nthat feed on fish swallow their prey as soon as it is caught. The\nStork was never seen to swim as the heron sometimes does, but it would\nwade as long as it could place its feet on the bed of the stream, and\nwould strain its head and the whole of its neck under water in\nsearching for fish.\n\nIt was of a mild and peaceable disposition, and, even if angered, did\nnot attempt to bite or strike with its beak, but only denoted its\ndispleasure by blowing the air sharply from its lungs, and nodding its\nhead repeatedly. After the manner of Storks, it always chose an\nelevated spot on which to repose, and took its rest standing on one\nleg, with its head so sunk among the feathers of its shoulders that\nscarcely any part of it was visible, the hinder part of the head\nresting on the back, and the bill lying on the fore-part of the neck.\n\nThough the bird is so capable of domestication, it does not of its own\naccord haunt the dwellings of men, like the White Stork, but avoids\nthe neighbourhood of houses, and lives in the most retired places it\ncan find. It may generally be seen in marshy grounds, spending the\ngreater part of its time in procuring food, or in going to and from\nits nest while engaged in the task of feeding its young.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SWAN.\n\n Signification of the word _Tinshemeth_--The Gallinule and the\n Ibis--Appearance and habits of the Hyacinthine Gallinule--A\n strange use for the bird--The White or Sacred Ibis--The bird\n mentioned by Herodotus--The Glossy Ibis, or Black\n Ibis--Veneration with which the bird was regarded.\n\n\nIn the two parallel chapters of Lev. xi. 18 and Deut. xiv. 16, the\nHebrew word _tinshemeth_ is found, and evidently signifies some kind\nof bird which was forbidden as food. After stating (Lev. xi. 13) that\n\"these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls;\nthey shall not be eaten, they are an abomination,\" the sacred lawgiver\nproceeds to enumerate a number of birds, nearly all of which have\nalready been described. Among them occurs the name of _tinshemeth_,\nbetween the great owl and the pelican.\n\nWhat was the precise species of bird which was signified by this name\nit is impossible to say, but there is no doubt that it could not have\nbeen the Swan, according to the rendering of the Authorized Version.\nThe Swan is far too rare a bird in Palestine to have been specially\nmentioned in the law of Moses, and in all probability it was totally\nunknown to the generality of the Israelites. Even had it been known to\nthem, and tolerably common, there seems to be no reason why it should\nhave been reckoned among the list of unclean birds.\n\nOn turning to the Hebrew Bible, we find that the word is left\nuntranslated, and simply given in its Hebrew form, thereby signifying\nthat the translators could form no opinion whatever of the proper\nrendering of the word. The Septuagint translates the Tinshemeth as the\nPorphyrio or Ibis, and the Vulgate follows the same rendering. Later\nnaturalists have agreed that the Septuagint and Vulgate have the far\nmore probable reading; and, as two birds are there mentioned, they\nwill be both described.\n\n [Illustration: IBIS AND GALLINULE (SWAN OF SCRIPTURES).\n\n \"_These are they of which ye shall not eat ... the little owl, and the\n great owl, and the swan._\" DEUT. xiv. 12, 16.]\n\nThe first is the Porphyrio, by which we may understand the HYACINTHINE\nGALLINULE (_Porphyrio veterum_). All the birds of this group are\nremarkable for the enormous length of their toes, by means of which\nthey are enabled to walk upon the loose herbage that floats on the\nsurface of the water as firmly as if they were treading on land. Their\nfeet are also used, like those of the parrots, in conveying food to\nthe mouth. We have in England a very familiar example of the\nGallinules in the common water-hen, or moor-hen, the toes of which are\nof great proportionate length, though not so long as those of the\nPurple Gallinule, which almost rivals in this respect the jacanas of\nSouth America and China. The water-rail, and corncrake or land-rail,\nare also allied to the Gallinules.\n\nThe Hyacinthine Gallinule derives its name from its colour, which is a\nrich and variable blue, taking a turquoise hue on the head, neck,\nthroat, and breast, and deep indigo on the back. The large bill and\nthe legs are red. Like many other birds, however, it varies much in\ncolour according to age.\n\nIt has a very wide geographical range, being found in many parts of\nEurope, Asia, and Africa, and is common in the marshy districts of\nPalestine, where its rich blue plumage and its large size, equalling\nthat of a duck, render it very conspicuous. The large and powerful\nbill of this bird betokens the nature of its food, which consists\nalmost entirely of hard vegetable substances, the seeds of aquatic\nherbage forming a large portion of its diet. When it searches for food\non the seashore, it eats the marine vegetation, mixing with this diet\nother articles of an animal nature, such as molluscs and small\nreptiles.\n\nThough apparently a clumsy bird, it moves with wonderful speed,\nrunning not only swiftly but gracefully, its large feet being no\nhindrance to the rapidity of its movements. It is mostly found in\nshallow marshes, where the construction of its feet enables it to\ntraverse both the soft muddy ground and the patches of firm earth with\nequal ease. Its wings, however, are by no means equal to its legs\neither in power or activity; and, like most of the rail tribe, it\nnever takes to the air unless absolutely obliged to do so.\n\nThe nest of the Hyacinthine Gallinule is made on the sedge-patches\nwhich dot the marshes, much like that of the coot. The nest, too,\nresembles that of the coot, being composed of reeds, sedges, and other\naquatic plants. The eggs are three or four in number, white in colour,\nand nearly spherical in form.\n\nThe ancients were well acquainted with the Hyacinthine Gallinule, and\nwere in the habit of keeping it tamed in their houses, in which case\nit was prized by the men and hated by the women. There was a popular\nidea about the bird that it always detected any infidelity on the part\nof the female sex, and that when the master of the house came home the\nbird acquainted him with the crime by making gestures as if it wished\nto strangle itself.\n\nThere are several species of Gallinule, but that which has just been\ndescribed is the most conspicuous, and therefore, if either of the\nGallinules be the Tinshemeth of the Jewish lawgiver, we may safely\nconclude that the Hyacinthine Gallinule is the species.\n\n\nAs, however, the Ibis has an equal claim to the title of Tinshemeth,\nwe will devote a few lines to a description of the bird. The\nparticular species which would be signified by the word _tinshemeth_\nwould undoubtedly be the WHITE or SACRED IBIS (_Ibis religiosa_), a\nbird which derives its name of Sacred from the reverence with which it\nwas held by the ancient Egyptians, and the frequency with which its\nfigure occurs in the monumental sculptures. It was also thought worthy\nof being embalmed, and many mummies of the Ibis have been found in the\nold Egyptian burial-places, having been preserved for some three\nthousand years.\n\nIn his account of the various animals which were accounted sacred by\nthe Egyptians, Herodotus mentions the Ibis, mixing up a considerable\namount of truth with a few errors, and a good deal of superstition.\nHaving heard of the relics of some winged serpents near the city of\nButo, he went to see them. \"When I arrived there I saw bones and\nspines of serpents, in such quantities as it would be impossible to\ndescribe: there were heaps of these spinal bones, some large, some\nsmaller, and some still less, and there were great numbers of them.\n\n\"The place in which these spinal bones lie scattered is of the\nfollowing description:--It is a narrow pass between two mountains into\na spacious plain; this plain is contiguous to the plain of Egypt. It\nis reported that, at the beginning of spring, winged serpents fly from\nArabia towards Egypt; but that the ibises, a sort of bird, meet them\nat the pass, and do not allow the serpents to go by, but kill them.\nFor this service the Arabians say that the ibis is highly reverenced\nby the Egyptians, and the Egyptians acknowledge that they reverence\nthese birds for this reason.\n\n\"The ibis is of the following description. It is all over a deep\nblack, it has the legs of a crane, its beak is much curved, and it is\nabout the size of a _crex_. Such is the form of the black ones that\nfight with the serpents. But those that are commonly conversant among\nmen (for there are two species) are bare on the head and the whole\nneck; have white plumage, except on the head, the throat, and the tips\nof the wings and extremity of the tail. In all these parts that I have\nmentioned they are of a deep black; in their legs and back they are\nlike the other kind.\" (Herod. \"Euterpe,\" 75, 76, Cary's translation.)\n\nPutting aside the mention of the winged serpents, of which he only\nlearned by hearsay, we find that Herodotus has given a very fair\naccount of two species of Ibis,--namely, the GLOSSY or GREEN IBIS\n(_Ibis falcinellus_), and the White or Sacred Ibis, whose scientific\nnames have already been given.\n\nThe Glossy Ibis has been known to come as far as the British shores,\nbut it requires a much warmer climate than that of England in order to\npass its life in a state of health. It has, however, a large\ngeographical range, being found both in Northern Africa and Southern\nAmerica. It derives its popular name from the rich glossy plumage,\nwhich shines with a metallic or rather a silken lustre that is\nsingularly beautiful in life, and is with great difficulty preserved\nin stuffed specimens.\n\nThe principal hue of the bird is very deep green, but it is so \"shot\"\nwith reflections of rich purple, blue, and gold, that it alters its\nhue with every change of light. At a little distance the deep green\nplumage looks quite black, as does that of the magpie, and on this\naccount it has been called by Herodotus the Black Ibis.\n\nThis species is popularly called Abou Menzel, or Father Sickle-bill,\non account of its slender curved beak, and in some places goes by the\nname of Abou Hannes, or Father John, because it makes its appearance\nupon or about St. John's Day. From all appearance, it does not feed\nupon snakes, seeming to restrict itself to molluscs and similar food;\nand, on account of this discrepancy with the account given by\nHerodotus, many writers have doubted whether it could really be the\nbird meant by that historian and traveller. But we must remember that,\nthough he saw both the black and the white Ibis, he did not see\neither of them eat snakes; and as those who told him of their\nserpent-devouring habits stated at the same time that the snakes had\nwings like those of the bat, we may summarily dismiss their account\nfrom the argument.\n\nThe White Ibis, however, is the bird which was most highly venerated\nby the Egyptians, and probably for that very reason was placed among\nthe list of prohibited birds in the ancient law. It is about as large\nas an ordinary hen, and, as its name imports, has the greater part of\nits plumage white, the ends of the wing-feathers and the coverts being\nblack, with violet reflections. The long neck is black and bare, and\nhas a most curious aspect, looking as if it were made of an old black\nkid glove, very much crumpled, but still retaining its gloss.\n\nThe reason for the extreme veneration with which the bird was regarded\nby the ancient Egyptians seems rather obscure. It is probable,\nhowever, that the partial migration of the bird was connected in their\nminds with the rise of the Nile, a river as sacred to the old\nEgyptians as the Ganges to the modern Hindoo. As soon as the water\nbegins to rise, the Ibis makes its appearance, sometimes alone, and\nsometimes in small troops. It haunts the banks of the river, and\nmarshy places in general, diligently searching for food by the aid of\nits long bill. It can fly well and strongly, and it utters at\nintervals a rather loud cry, dipping its head at every utterance.\nSpecimens of these birds can be seen at the Zoological Gardens.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CORMORANT.\n\n The word _Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k_ and its signification--The Greek\n Catarrhactes--Habits of the Cormorant--The bird trained to catch\n fish--Mode of securing its prey--Nests and eggs of the\n Cormorant--Nesting in fir-trees--Flesh of the bird.\n\n\nAlthough in the Authorized Version of the Scriptures the word\nCormorant occurs three times, there is no doubt that in two of the\npassages the Hebrew word ought to have been rendered as Pelican, as we\nshall see when we come presently to the description of that bird.\n\nIn the two parallel passages, Lev. xi. 17 and Deut. xiv. 17, a\ncreature called the Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k is mentioned in the list of prohibited\nmeats. That the Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k must be a bird is evident from the context, and\nwe are therefore only left to discover what sort of bird it may be. On\nlooking at the etymology of the word we find that it is derived from\na root which signifies hurling or casting down, and we may therefore\npresume that the bird is one which plunges or sweeps down upon its\nprey.\n\nAll Hebraists have agreed that it is one of the sea-birds, and this\nview of the case seems to be taken in the Septuagint, where the word\nis rendered by Catarrhactes, a term that has the same derivation in\nGreek as the Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k in Hebrew. It is indeed the same word from which\nwe form our term \"cataract,\" to express the manner in which the water\nplunges or is hurled down from a height.\n\nIn consequence of this derivation, several writers have thought that\nthe Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k might be the Solan goose, or gannet, a bird which lives on\nfish, and always takes its prey by darting down upon it from a height.\nThis bird, however, although it certainly answers completely to the\nsense of the word _sh\u00e2l\u00e2k_, is not common enough on the shores of\nPalestine to be specially mentioned among the unclean birds. Other\nwriters, seeing this difficulty, have thought that the Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k might be\none of the terns, or sea-swallows, forgetful of the fact that these\nare not plunging birds, although exceedingly swift of flight.\n\nWeighing, however, the opinions of the various Hebraists and\nnaturalists, we may safely determine that the word _sh\u00e2l\u00e2k_ has been\nrightly translated in the Authorized Version. The Hebrew Bible gives\nthe same reading, and does not affix the mark of doubt to the word,\nthough there are very few of the long list of animals in Lev. xi. and\nDeut. xiv. which are not either distinguished by the mark of doubt,\nor, like the Tinshemeth, are left untranslated.\n\nThe Cormorant belongs to the family of the pelicans, the relationship\nbetween them being evident to the most unpractised eye; and the whole\nstructure of the bird shows its admirable adaptation for the life\nwhich it leads.\n\nIts long beak enables it to seize even a large fish, while the hook at\nthe end prevents the slippery prey from escaping. The long snake-like\nneck gives the bird the power of darting its beak with great rapidity,\nand at the same time allows it to seize prey immediately to the right\nor left of its course. Its strong, closely-feathered wings enable it\nto fly with tolerable speed, while at the same time they can be closed\nso tightly to the body that they do not hinder the progress of the\nbird through the water; while the tail serves equally when spread to\ndirect its course through the air, and when partially or entirely\nclosed to act as a rudder in the water. Lastly, its short powerful\nlegs, with their broadly-webbed feet, act as paddles, by which the\nbird urges itself through the water with such wonderful speed that it\ncan overtake and secure the fishes even in their own element. Besides\nthese outward characteristics, we find that the bird is able to make a\nvery long stay under water, the lungs being adapted so as to contain a\nwonderful amount of air.\n\nThe method of catching prey which is practised by the Cormorant is\nfamiliar to us from the fact that the Cormorant has been trained to\nplay the same part in the water as the falcon in the air, and has been\ntaught to catch fish, and bring them ashore for its master. So adroit\nare they, that if one of them should catch a fish which is too heavy\nfor it another bird will come to its assistance, and the two together\nwill bring the struggling prey to land. Trained birds of this\ndescription have been employed in China from time immemorial, and in\nlater years they have been re-introduced into England, where they have\noften exhibited their really wonderful powers.\n\nIn the days of Charles I. these birds were kept in training, and there\nwas attached to the Court a professed official, called the Kings\nMaster of the Cormorants. These birds were usually caught and trained\nin Holland, and thence exported to England. The disturbed state of the\ncountry during the civil wars, added to the sport-destroying character\nof the Puritans, seems to have caused the sport to be abandoned in\nthis country, and it is only within the last few years that they have\nbeen again employed. In order to prevent it from swallowing the fish\nwhich it takes, each bird has a ring or ligature passed round its\nneck.\n\nThe Cormorant is a most voracious bird, swallowing a considerable\nweight of fish at a meal, and digesting them so rapidly that it is\nsoon ready for another supply. Although it is essentially a marine\nbird, hunger often takes it inland, especially to places where are\nlakes or large rivers. Mr. Waterton mentions, in his \"Essays on\nNatural History,\" that the Cormorants often visited the lake at Walton\nHall, and that they soon became so familiar and fearless, that after\ncatching and eating their prey they would sit on the terrace and preen\ntheir feathers under the windows of the drawing-room.\n\nThe lake is by no means a large one, and it is probable that the birds\nwere attracted by the absolute security which was felt by every winged\ncreature within the domain. \"His skill in diving,\" writes Mr.\nWaterton, \"is most admirable, and his success beyond belief. You may\nknow him at a distance, among a thousand water-fowl, by his upright\nneck, by his body being apparently half immersed in the water, and by\nhis being perpetually in motion when not on land.\n\n\"While the ducks and teal and widgeons are stationary on the pool, the\ncormorant is seen swimming to and fro, as if in quest of something.\nFirst raising his body nearly perpendicular, down he plunges into the\ndeep, and, after staying there a considerable time, he is sure to\nbring up a fish, which he invariably swallows head foremost. Sometimes\nhalf an hour elapses before he can manage to accommodate a large eel\nquietly in his stomach.\n\n\"You see him straining violently with repeated efforts to gulp it; and\nwhen you fancy that the slippery mouthful is successfully disposed of,\nall on a sudden the eel retrogrades upwards from its dismal sepulchre,\nstruggling violently to escape. The cormorant swallows it again, and\nup again it comes, and shows its tail a foot or more out of its\ndestroyer's mouth. At length, worn out with ineffectual writhings and\nslidings, the eel is gulped down into the cormorant's stomach for the\nlast time, there to meet its dreaded and inevitable fate.\"\n\nMr. Fortune gives a somewhat similar account of the feeding of tame\nCormorants in China. The birds preferred eels to all other food, and,\nin spite of the difficulty in swallowing the slippery and active\ncreature, would not touch another fish as long as an eel was left. The\nbird is so completely at home in the water that it does not need, like\nthe heron and other aquatic birds, to bring its prey ashore in order\nto swallow it, but can eat fish in the water as well as catch them. It\nalways seizes the fish crosswise, and is therefore obliged to turn it\nbefore it can swallow the prey with the head downwards. Sometimes it\ncontrives to turn the fish while still under water, but, if it should\nfail in so doing, it brings its prey to the surface, and shifts it\nabout in its bill, making a series of little snatches at it until the\nhead is in the right direction. When it seizes a very large fish, the\nbird shakes its prey just as a dog shakes a rat, and so disables it.\nIt is said to eat its own weight of fish in a single day.\n\nSometimes, when it has been very successful or exceptionally hungry,\nit loads itself with food to such an extent that it becomes almost\ninsensible during the process of digestion, and, although naturally a\nkeen-eyed and wary bird, allows itself to be captured by hand.\n\nThe nest of the Cormorant is always upon a rocky ledge, and generally\non a spot which is inaccessible except by practised climbers furnished\nwith ropes, poles, hooks, and other appurtenances. Mr. Waterton\nmentions that when he descended the Raincliff, a precipice some four\nhundred feet in height, he saw numbers of the nests and eggs, but\ncould not get at them except by swinging himself boldly off the face\nof the cliff, so as to be brought by the return swing into the\nrecesses chosen by the birds.\n\nThe nests are mostly placed in close proximity to each other, and are\nmade of sticks and seaweeds, and, as is usual with such nests, are\nvery inartificially constructed. The eggs are of a greenish white on\nthe outside, and green on the inside. When found in the nest, they are\ncovered with a sort of chalky crust, so that the true colour is not\nperceptible until the crust is scraped off. Two to four eggs are\ngenerally laid in, or rather on, each nest. As may be imagined from\nthe character of the birds' food, the odour of the nesting-place is\nmost horrible.\n\nSometimes, when rocks cannot be found, the Cormorant is obliged to\nselect other spots for its nest. It is mentioned in the \"Proceedings\nof the Zoological Society,\" that upon an island in the midst of a\nlarge lake there were a number of Scotch fir-trees, upon the branches\nof which were about eighty nests of the Cormorant.\n\nThe flesh of the Cormorant is very seldom eaten, as it has a fishy\nflavour which is far from agreeable. To eat an old Cormorant is indeed\nalmost impossible, but the young birds may be rendered edible by\ntaking them as soon as killed, skinning them, removing the whole of\nthe interior, wrapping them in cloths, and burying them for some time\nin the ground.\n\nFrom the account of this bird, the reader will see that it may well be\nthe Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k of the Old Testament. Owing to its size and its peculiar\nhabits, it is a very conspicuous bird, and therefore likely to be\nselected by name by the ancient lawgiver. And although its flesh is\nnot very agreeable, it can be eaten; and, as has been shown, can be\nrendered tolerably palatable by a very simple process. The flesh of\nthe Solan goose is deprived in a similar manner of its naturally rank\nand fishy flavour.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PELICAN.\n\n The Pelican of the wilderness--Attitudes of the bird--Its love\n of solitude--Derivation of the Hebrew word--Fantastic\n interpretation--Mode of feeding the young--Fables regarding the\n Pelican--Breeding-places of the bird--The object of its wide\n wings and large pouch--Colour of the Pelican.\n\n\nOn page 490 it has been mentioned that in two passages of Scripture,\nthe word which is translated in the Authorized Version as Cormorant,\nought to have been rendered as PELICAN. These, however, are not the\nfirst passages in which we meet with the word _kaath_. The name occurs\nin the two parallel passages of Lev. xi. and Deut. xiv. among the list\nof birds which are proscribed as food. Passing over them, we next come\nto Ps. cii. 6. In this passage, the sacred writer is lamenting his\nmisery: \"By reason of the voice of my groaning my bones cleave to my\nskin.\n\n\"I am like a pelican of the wilderness: I am like an owl of the\ndesert.\"\n\nIn these sentences, we see that the Kaath was a bird of solitude that\nwas to be found in the \"wilderness,\" _i.e._ far from the habitations\nof man. This is one of the characteristics of the Pelican, which loves\nnot the neighbourhood of human beings, and is fond of resorting to\nbroad, uncultivated lands, where it will not be disturbed.\n\nIn them it makes its nest and hatches its young, and to them it\nretires after feeding, in order to digest in quiet the ample meal\nwhich it has made. Mr. Tristram well suggests that the metaphor of the\nPsalmist may allude to the habit common to the Pelican and its kin, of\nsitting motionless for hours after it has gorged itself with food, its\nhead sunk on its shoulders, and its bill resting on its breast.\n\nThis is but one of the singular, and often grotesque, attitudes in\nwhich the Pelican is in the habit of indulging.\n\n [Illustration: THE PELICAN.\n\n \"_I am like a pelican in the wilderness._\"--PS. cii. 6.]\n\nThere are before me a number of sketches made of the Pelicans at the\nZoological Gardens, and in no two cases does one attitude in the least\nresemble another. In one sketch the bird is sitting in the attitude\nwhich has just been described. In another it is walking, or rather\nstaggering, along, with its head on one side, and its beak so closed\nthat hardly a vestige of its enormous pouch can be seen. Another\nsketch shows the same bird as it appeared when angry with a companion,\nand scolding its foe in impotent rage; while another shows it basking\nin the sun, with its magnificent wings spread and shaking in the warm\nbeams, and its pouch hanging in folds from its chin.\n\nOne of the most curious of these sketches shows the bird squatting on\nthe ground, with its head drawn back as far as possible, and sunk so\nfar among the feathers of the back and shoulders that only a portion\nof the head itself can be seen, while the long beak is hidden, except\nan inch or two of the end. In this attitude it might easily be\nmistaken at a little distance for an oval white stone.\n\nThe derivation of the Hebrew word _kaath_ is a very curious one. It is\ntaken from a verb signifying \"to vomit,\" and this derivation has been\nexplained in different ways.\n\nThe early writers, who were comparatively ignorant of natural history,\nthought that the Pelican lived chiefly on molluscs, and that, after\ndigesting the animals, it rejected their shells, just as the owl and\nthe hawk reject the bones, fur, and feathers of their prey. They\nthought that the Pelican was a bird of a hot temperament, and that the\nmolluscs were quickly digested by the heat of the stomach: \"conchas\nenim, calore ventris coctas, rursus evomit, ut testis rejectis,\nesculenta seligat.\"\n\nAt the present day, however, knowing as we do the habits of the\nPelican, we find that, although the reasons just given are faulty, and\nthat the Pelican lives essentially on fish, and not on molluscs, the\nderivation of the word is really a good one, and that those who gave\nthe bird the name of Kaath, or the vomiter, were well acquainted with\nits habits.\n\nThe bird certainly does eat molluscs, but the principal part of its\ndiet is composed of fish, which it catches dexterously by a sort of\nsidelong snatch of its enormous bill. The skin under the lower part of\nthe beak is so modified that it can form, when distended, an enormous\npouch, capable of holding a great quantity of fish, though, as long as\nit is not wanted, the pouch is so contracted into longitudinal folds\nas to be scarcely perceptible. When it has filled the pouch, it\nusually retires from the water, and flies to a retired spot, often\nmany miles inland, where it can sit and digest at its ease the\nenormous meal which it has made.\n\nAs it often chooses its breeding-places in similar spots, far from the\nwater, it has to carry the food with which it nourishes its young for\nmany miles. For this purpose it is furnished, not only with the pouch\nwhich has been just mentioned, but with long, wide, and very powerful\nwings, often measuring from twelve to thirteen feet from tip to tip.\nNo one, on looking at a Pelican as it waddles about or sits at rest,\nwould imagine the gigantic dimensions of the wings, which seem, as the\nbird spreads them, to have almost as unlimited a power of expansion as\nthe pouch.\n\nIn these two points the true Pelicans present a strong contrast to the\ncormorants, though birds closely allied. The cormorant has its home\nclose by the sea, and therefore needs not to carry its food for any\ndistance. Consequently, it needs no pouch, and has none. Neither does\nit require the great expanse of wing which is needful for the Pelican,\nthat has to carry such a weight of fish through the air. Accordingly,\nthe wings, though strong enough to enable the bird to carry for a\nshort distance a single fish of somewhat large size, are comparatively\nshort and closely feathered, and the flight of the cormorant possesses\nneither the grace nor the power which distinguishes that of the\nPelican.\n\nWhen the Pelican feeds its young, it does so by pressing its beak\nagainst its breast, so as to force out of it the enclosed fish. Now\nthe tip of the beak is armed, like that of the cormorant, with a\nsharply-curved hook, only, in the case of the Pelican, the hook is of\na bright scarlet colour, looking, when the bird presses the beak\nagainst the white feathers of the breast, like a large drop of blood.\nHence arose the curious legend respecting the Pelican, which\nrepresented it as feeding its young with its own blood, and tearing\nopen its breast with its hooked bill. We find that this legend is\nexemplified by the oft-recurring symbol of the \"Pelican feeding its\nyoung\" in ecclesiastical art, as an emblem of Divine love.\n\nThis is one of the many instances in which the inventive, poetical,\ninaccurate Oriental mind has seized some peculiarity of form, and\nbased upon it a whole series of fabulous legends. As long as they\nrestricted themselves to the appearance and habits of the animals with\nwhich they were familiarly acquainted, the old writers were curiously\nfull, exact, and precise in their details. But as soon as they came to\nany creature of whose mode of life they were entirely or partially\nignorant, they allowed their inventive faculties full scope, and put\nforward as zoological facts statements which were the mere creation of\ntheir own fancy. We have already seen several examples of this\npropensity, and shall find more as we proceed with the zoology of the\nScriptures.\n\nThe fabulous legends of the Pelican are too numerous to be even\nmentioned, but there is one which deserves notice, because it is made\nthe basis of an old Persian fable.\n\nThe writer of the legend evidently had some partial knowledge of the\nbird. He knew that it had a large pouch which could hold fish and\nwater; that it had large and powerful wings; and that it was in the\nhabit of flying far inland, either for the purpose of digesting its\nfood or nourishing its young. Knowing that the Pelican is in the habit\nof choosing solitary spots in which it may bring up its young in\nsafety, but not knowing the precise mode of its nesting, the writer in\nquestion has trusted to his imagination, and put forward his theories\nas facts.\n\nKnowing that the bird dwells in \"the wilderness,\" he has assumed that\nthe wilderness in question is a sandy, arid desert, far from water,\nand consequently from vegetation. Such being the case, the nurture of\nthe Pelican's young is evidently a difficult question. Being aquatic\nbirds, the young must needs require water for drink and bathing, as\nwell as fish for food; and, though a supply of both these necessaries\ncould be brought in the ample pouches of the parents, they would be\nwasted unless some mode of storing were employed.\n\nAccordingly, the parent birds were said to make their nest in a hollow\ntree, and to line it with clay, or to build it altogether of clay, so\nas to leave a deep basin. This basin the parent birds were said to use\nas a sort of store-pond, bringing home supplies of fish and water in\ntheir pouches, and pouring them into the pond. The wild beasts who\nlived in the desert were said to be acquainted with these nests, and\nto resort to them daily in order to quench their thirst, repaying\ntheir entertainers by protecting their homes.\n\nIn real fact, the Pelican mostly breeds near water, and is fond of\nselecting little rocky islands where it cannot be approached without\ndanger. The nest is made on the ground, and is formed in a most\ninartificial manner of reeds and grass, the general mass of the nest\nbeing made of the reeds, and the lining being formed of grass. The\neggs are white, of nearly the same shape at both ends, and are from\ntwo to five in number. On an average, however, each nest will contain\nabout two eggs.\n\nThe parent birds are very energetic in defence of their eggs or young,\nand, according to Le Vaillant, when approached they are \"like furious\nharpies let loose against us, and their cries rendered us almost deaf.\nThey often flew so near us that they flapped their wings in our faces,\nand, though we fired our pieces repeatedly, we were not able to\nfrighten them.\" When the well-known naturalist Sonnerat tried to drive\na female Pelican from her nest, she appeared not to be frightened, but\nangry. She would not move from her nest, and when he tried to push her\noff, she struck at him with her long bill and uttered cries of rage.\n\nIn order to aid the bird in carrying the heavy weights with which it\nloads itself, the whole skeleton is permeated with air, and is\nexceedingly light. Beside this, the whole cellular system of the bird\nis honeycombed with air-cells, so that the bulk of the bird can be\ngreatly increased, while its weight remains practically unaltered, and\nthe Pelican becomes a sort of living balloon.\n\nThe habit of conveying its food inland before eating it is so\ncharacteristic of the Pelican that other birds take advantage of it.\nIn some countries there is a large hawk which robs the Pelican, just\nas the bald-headed eagle of America robs the osprey. Knowing\ninstinctively that when a Pelican is flying inland slowly and heavily\nand with a distended pouch it is carrying a supply of food to its\nhome, the hawk dashes at it, and frightens it so that the poor bird\nopens its beak, and gives up to the assailant the fish which it was\nbearing homewards.\n\nIt is evident that the wings which are needed for supporting such\nweights, and which, as we have seen, exceed twelve feet in length from\ntip to tip, would be useless in the water, and would hinder rather\nthan aid the bird if it attempted to dive as the close-winged\ncormorant does. Accordingly, we find that the Pelican is not a diver,\nand, instead of chasing its finny prey under water, after the manner\nof the cormorant, it contents itself with scooping up in its beak the\nfishes which come to the surface of the water. The very buoyancy of\nits body would prevent it from diving as does the cormorant, and,\nalthough it often plunges into the water so fairly as to be for a\nmoment submerged, it almost immediately rises, and pursues its course\non the surface of the water, and not beneath it. Like the cormorant,\nthe Pelican can perch on trees, though it does not select such spots\nfor its roosting-places, and prefers rocks to branches. In one case,\nhowever, when some young Pelicans had been captured and tied to a\nstake, their mother used to bring them food during the day, and at\nnight was accustomed to roost in the branches of a tree above them.\n\nOne of the two passages to which allusion has already been made in\nwhich the word _kaath_ has been wrongly translated, occurs in Isa.\nxxxiv. 10, 11: \"From generation to generation it shall lie waste; none\nshall pass through it for ever and ever.\n\n\"But the cormorant [Pelican in margin] and the bittern shall possess\nit; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and He shall stretch\nout upon it the line of confusion and the stones of emptiness.\"\n\nThese words form part of a prophecy concerning Idum\u00e6a or Edom, in\nwhich the desolation that is to come upon the land is painted in the\nmost vivid colours. The streams are to be turned into pitch, and the\ndust into brimstone; thorns are to come up in the palaces, and nettles\nand brambles in the fortresses, and the land is to be washed with\nblood. And so great is to be the desolation of the land, that even the\nPelican, which keeps itself far from the habitations of men, is to\npossess it.\n\nA similar figure is employed by the prophet Zephaniah, when writing of\nthe utter destruction of Nineveh, that \"rejoicing city, that dwelt\ncarelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and there is no more beside\nme.\" In chap. ii. ver. 13, 14, the prophet writes as follows: \"He will\nstretch out His hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and will\nmake Nineveh a desolation, and dry like a wilderness.\n\n\"And flocks shall lie down in the midst of her, all the beasts of the\nnations; both the cormorant [Pelican] and bittern shall lodge in the\nupper lintels of it, their voices shall sing in the windows;\ndesolation shall be in the threshold: for He shall overcome the cedar\nwork.\"\n\nIn both these passages the Jewish Bible renders the word _kaath_ as\nPelican. For a further explanation of them the reader is referred to\nthe article on the hedgehog.\n\nIt will be now seen that, accepting the Kaath to be the Pelican, the\nimagery of the scriptural writers is as accurate as it is forcible.\nThough under some circumstances a thoroughly social bird, it is yet\nfond of retiring to the most solitary spots in order to consume at\npeace the prey that it has captured; and, as it sits motionless and\nalone for hours, more like a white stone than, a bird, it may well be\naccepted as a type of solitude and desolation.\n\nThe colour of the common Pelican is white, with a very slight pinky\ntinge, which is most conspicuous in the breeding season. The feathers\nof the crest are yellow, and the quill feathers of the wings are jetty\nblack, contrasting well with the white plumage of the body. The pouch\nis yellow, and the upper part of the beak bluish grey, with a red line\nrunning across the middle, and a bright red hook at the tip. This\nplumage belongs only to the adult bird, that of the young being ashen\ngrey, and four or five years are required before the bird puts on its\nfull beauty. There is no difference in the appearance of the sexes.\nThe illustration on page 496 represents a fine old male Crested\nPelican (_Pelecanus cristatus_). The general colour is greyish white,\nwith a slight yellowish tint on the breast. The pouch is bright\norange, and the crest is formed of curling feathers.\n\n\n\n\nREPTILES.\n\n\n\n\nTHE TORTOISE.\n\n Reptiles in general--Looseness of the term \"creeping\n things\"--The Tzab of the Scriptures, translated as\n Tortoise--Flesh and eggs of the Tortoise--Its slow\n movements--Hibernation dependent on temperature--The\n \"Water-Tortoises--Their food and voracity--Their eggs--Their\n odour terrifying the horses--The Dhubb lizard and its\n legends--Its armed tail, and the use made of it--Its food, and\n localities which it prefers.\n\n\nWe now come to a different class of animated beings. We have already\nfound that the sacred writers were very loose in their nomenclature of\nthe mammalia and birds, and we may therefore expect to find that even\ngreater uncertainty prevails with regard to the REPTILES. It is\nevident that the sacred writers classed together the \"creeping things\"\nof the earth, without troubling themselves about zoological accuracy,\nand that by them a lizard, a centipede, and a caterpillar would have\nbeen alike classed as belonging to the \"creeping things.\" For example,\nwe learn in Deut. xiv. 19 that \"every creeping thing that flieth\" is\nunclean. On referring to Levit. xi. 21, we find that the same\nprohibition is repeated, but with an addition that shows that the\nsacred writer is treating of insects under the head of \"creeping\nthings.\" \"Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that\ngoeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal\nupon the earth;\n\n\"Even these of them may ye eat; the locust after his kind, and the\nbald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the\ngrasshopper after his kind.\n\n\"But all other flying creeping things which have four feet shall be an\nabomination unto you.\"\n\nAs to the particular species signified by these different insects, the\nreader is referred to that portion of the work which treats of\nentomology; and it is sufficient to observe that in this passage the\nterm \"creeping things\" is employed to designate insects.\n\nIf we pass to verse 42 of the same chapter, we find that among the\n\"creeping things\" the centipedes, millepedes, and very probably the\ncaterpillars, are ranked. \"Whatsoever hath more feet among all\ncreeping things that creep upon the earth, them ye shall not eat, for\nthey are an abomination.\n\n\"Ye shall not make yourselves [or, your souls] abominable with any\ncreeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean\nwith them, that ye should be defiled thereby.\"\n\nAgain, in Ps. civ. 24, 25, different orders of animals are classed\nunder the name of creeping things: \"0 Lord, how manifold are Thy\nworks! in wisdom hast Thou made them all: the earth is full of Thy\nriches.\n\n\"So is this great and wide sea, wherein are things creeping\ninnumerable, both small and great beasts.\" In this passage it is\nprobable that the sacred writer classed together all the inhabitants\nof the sea that creep and that do not swim with fins, and that under\nthis term are first comprised the marine turtles, and perhaps snakes.\nIndeed, from verses 10 and 11 of Levit. xi. it is almost certain that\nmarine and aquatic reptiles are signified: \"All that have not fins and\nscales in the seas and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters,\nand of every living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an\nabomination unto you:\n\n\"They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their\nflesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.\"\n\nThis prohibition also includes the whole of the molluscs, and the\nmarine worms, or annelids.\n\nWe will take these creatures in their order, and begin with those\nwhich are classed as Reptiles by the zoologists of the present day,\nand which are distinguished by having a bony skeleton, breathing by\nmeans of lungs and not of gills, having a heart with two auricles and\none ventricle, and the skin being covered with horny plates or scales.\nThe first in order are those which are covered with plates, and which\nare known as the Chelarians, including the Tortoises and Turtles.\n\n\nIn Levit. xi. 29, there occurs among the list of unclean beasts a word\nwhich is translated in the Authorized Version as \"tortoise.\" The word\nis _Tzab_, and is rendered in the Hebrew Bible as \"lizard,\" but with\nthe mark of doubt affixed to it. As the correct translation of the\nword is very dubious, we shall examine it in both these senses.\n\n [Illustration: THE DHUBB AND TORTOISE.\n\n \"_These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that\n creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise\n after his kind_.\"--LEVIT. xi. 29.]\n\nThe common Tortoise (_Testudo Gr\u00e6ca_) is very common in Palestine, and\nis so plentiful that it would certainly have been used by the\nIsraelites as food, had it not been prohibited by law. At the present\nday it is cooked and eaten by the inhabitants of the country who are\nnot Jews, and its eggs are in as great request as those of the fowl.\n\nThese eggs are hard, nearly spherical, thick-shelled, and covered with\nminute punctures, giving them a roughness like that of a file. In\ncaptivity the Tortoise is very careless about the mode in which they\nare deposited, and I have seen a large yard almost covered with eggs\nlaid by Tortoises and abandoned. The white or albumen of the egg is so\nstiff and gelatinous that to empty one of them without breaking the\nshell is a difficult task, and the yolk is very dark, and covered with\nminute spots of black. When fresh the eggs are as good as those of the\nfowl, and many persons even think them better; the only drawback being\nthat their small size and thick shell cause considerable trouble in\neating them.\n\nThe flesh of the Tortoise is eaten, not only by human beings, but by\nbirds, such as the l\u00e4mmergeier. In order to get at the flesh of the\nTortoise, they carry it high in the air and drop it on the ground so\nas to break the shell to pieces, should the reptile fall on a stone or\nrock. If, as is not often the case in such a rocky land as that of\nPalestine, it should fall on a soft spot, the bird picks it up, soars\naloft, and drops it again.\n\nThe Tortoises have no teeth, but yet are able to crop the herbage with\nperfect ease. In lieu of teeth the edges of the jaws are sharp-edged\nand very hard, so that they cut anything that comes between them like\na pair of shears. Leaves that are pulpy and crisp are bitten through\nat once, but those that are thin, tough, and fibrous are rather torn\nthan bitten, the Tortoise placing its feet upon them, and dragging\nthem to pieces with its jaws. The carnivorous Tortoises have a similar\nhabit, as we shall presently see.\n\nThis is the species from whose deliberate and slow movements the\nfamiliar metaphor of \"slow as a Tortoise\" was derived, and it is this\nspecies which is the hero of the popular fable of the \"Hare and the\nTortoise.\" Many of the reptiles are very slow in some things and\nastonishingly quick in others. Some of the lizards, for example, will\nat one time remain motionless for many hours together, or creep about\nwith a slow and snail-like progress, while at others they dart from\nspot to spot with such rapidity that the eye can scarcely follow their\nmovements. This however is not the case with the Tortoise, which is\nalways slow, and, but for the defensive armour in which it is encased,\nwould long ago have been extirpated.\n\nDuring the whole of the summer months it may be seen crawling\ndeliberately among the herbage, eating in the same deliberate style\nwhich characterises all its movements, and occasionally resting in the\nsame spot for many hours together, apparently enjoying the warm beams\nof the sunshine.\n\nAs winter approaches, it slowly scrapes a deep hole in the ground, and\nburies itself until the following spring awakes it once more to active\nlife. The depth of its burrow depends on the severity of the winter,\nfor, as the cold increases, the Tortoise sinks itself more deeply into\nthe earth.\n\n\nMENTION has been made of a species of Tortoise that inhabits the\nwater. This is the CASPIAN EMYS (_Emys caspica_), a small species,\nmeasuring about six inches in length. It belongs to the large family\nof the Terrapins, several of which are so well known in America, and\nhas a long, retractile neck, very sharp jaws, and webbed feet, and a\nwell-developed tail.\n\nThe body is flattish, and the colour is olive, with lines of yellow\nedged with black, and the head is marked with longitudinal streaks of\nbright yellow. After the death of the creature these yellow streaks\nfade away gradually, and at last become nearly black. The skin of the\nhead is thin, but very hard. In general appearance it is not unlike\nthe chicken Tortoise of America, a species which is often brought to\nEngland and kept in captivity, on account of its hardy nature and the\nlittle trouble which is needed for keeping it in health.\n\nI have kept specimens of the Caspian Emys for some time, and found\nthem to be more interesting animals than they at first promised to be.\nThey were active, swimming with considerable speed, and snatching\nquickly at anything which they fancied might be food.\n\nThey were exceedingly voracious, consuming daily a quantity of meat\napparently disproportioned to their size, and eating it in a manner\nthat strongly reminded me of the mole when engaged on a piece of meat\nor the body of a bird or mouse. The Tortoise would plant its fore-paws\nfirmly at each side of the meat, seize a mouthful in its jaws, and, by\nretracting its head violently, would tear away the piece which it had\ngrasped.\n\nThey are most destructive among fish, and are apt to rise quietly\nunderneath a fish as it basks near the surface of the water, grasp it\nbeneath with its sharp-edged jaws, and tear away the piece, leaving\nthe fish to die. It is rather remarkable that the Lepidosiren, or\nmud-fish of the Gambia, destroys fish in a precisely similar manner,\nthough, as its jaws are much sharper than those of the Emys, it does\nnot need the aid of fore-paws in biting out its mouthful of flesh.\n\nLike the land Tortoise, it is one of the hibernators, and during the\nwinter months buries itself deeply in the earth, choosing for this\npurpose the soft, muddy bed or bank of the pond in which it lives. Its\neggs are white, and hard-shelled, but are more oval than those of the\nland Tortoise, and both ends are nearly alike. In fact, its egg might\nwell be mistaken for that of a small pigeon. The shell has a\nporcelain-like look, and is very liable to crack, so that the\nresemblance is increased.\n\nThere is one drawback to these reptiles when kept as pets. They give\nout a very unpleasant odour, which is disagreeable to human nostrils,\nbut is absolutely terrifying to many animals. The monkey tribe have\nthe strongest objection to these aquatic Tortoises. I once held one of\nthem towards a very tame chimpanzee, much to his discomfiture. He\nmuttered and remonstrated, and retreated as far as he could, pushing\nout his lips in a funnel-like form, and showing his repugnance to the\nreptile in a manner that could not be mistaken.\n\nHorses seem to be driven almost frantic with terror, not only by the\nsight, but by the odour of these Tortoises. In Southern Africa there\nare Tortoises closely allied to the Caspian Emys, and having the same\npower of frightening horses. In \"Land and Water\" for February 22d,\n1869, there is an account of an adventure with one of those Tortoises,\ncalled in the catalogue of the British Museum the Reddish Pelamedusa.\nIt is of an olive colour, and, when adult, there is a slight\ndepression on either side of the vertebral line.\n\n\"Some very awkward accidents have occurred to parties from the terror\ncaused by the fresh-water turtle (_Pelamedusa subrufa_). Carts have\nbeen smashed to fragments, riders thrown, and the utmost confusion\ncaused by them. It is their smell, and it is certainly very\ndisagreeable.\n\n\"My first acquaintance with the fact was in this wise. I was out\nshooting with two young ladies who had volunteered as markers; and, as\nyou know, all our shooting is done from horseback. I had jumped off\nfor a shot at some francolins near a knill, or water-hole, and, after\npicking up my birds, was coming round the knill to windward of the\nhorses. In my path scrambled a turtle. I called out to my young\nfriends, and told them of my find, on which one of them, in a hasty\nvoice, said, 'Oh, please, Mr. L., don't touch it; you will frighten\nthe horses!'\n\n\"Of course I laughed at the idea, and picked up the reptile, which\ninstantly emitted its pungent odour--its means of defence. Though a\nlong way off, the moment the horses caught the scent, away they flew,\nshowing terror in every action. The girls, luckily splendid riders,\ntugged in vain at the reins; away they went over the Veldt, leaving me\nin mortal fear that the yawning 'aard-vark' holes (_Orycteropus\ncapensis_) would break their necks. My own horse, which I had hitched\nto a bush, tore away his bridle, and with the ends streaming in the\nwind and the stirrups clashing about him, sped off home at full\ngallop, and was only recovered after a severe chase by my gallant\nyoung Amazons, who, after a race of some miles, succeeded in checking\ntheir affrighted steeds and in securing my runaway. But for some hours\nafter, if I ventured to windward, there were wild-looking eyes and\ncocked ears--the smell of the reptile clung to me.\"\n\nShould any of my readers keep any of those water Tortoises, they will\ndo well to supply them plentifully with food, to give them an elevated\nrocky perch on which they can scramble, and on which they will sit for\nhours so motionless that at a little distance they can scarcely be\ndistinguished from the stone on which they rest. They should also be\nweighed at regular intervals, as decrease of weight is a sure sign\nthat something is wrong, and, as a general rule, is an almost certain\nprecursor of death.\n\nThis little reptile is not without its legends. According to the old\nwriters on natural history, it is of exceeding use to vine-growers in\nthe season when there is excess of rain or hail. Whenever the owner of\na vineyard sees a black cloud approaching, all he has to do is, to\ntake one of these Tortoises, lay it on its back, and carry it round\nthe vineyard. He must then go into the middle of the ground and lay\nthe reptile on the earth, still on its back; and the effect of this\nproceeding would be that the cloud would pass aside from a place so\nwell protected.\n\n\"But,\" proceeds the narrator, not wishing to be responsible for the\nstatement, \"such diabolical and foolish observations were not so muche\nto be remembered in this place, were it not for their sillinesse, that\nby knowing them men might learn the weaknesse of human wisdom when it\nerreth from the fountain of all science and true knowledge (which is\nDivinity), and the most approved assertions of nature. And so I will\nsay no more in this place of the sweet-water tortoise.\"\n\n\nTHE DHUBB.\n\nWe now come to the second animal, which may probably be the Tzab of\nthe Old Testament.\n\nThis creature is one of the lizards, and is a very odd-looking\ncreature. It is certainly not so attractive in appearance that the\nJews might be supposed to desire it as food; but it often happens\nthat, as is the case with the turtle and iguana, from the most\nungainly, in the latter animal even repulsive, forms are produced the\nmost delicate meats.\n\nThe DHUBB, or EGYPTIAN MASTIGURE, as the lizard is indifferently\ncalled, grows to a considerable size, measuring when adult three feet\nin length. Its colour is green, variegated with brown, and is slightly\nchangeable, though not to the extent that distinguishes the chameleon.\nThe chief peculiarity of this lizard consists in its tail, which is\ncovered with a series of whorls or circles of long, sharply-pointed,\nhard-edged scales. The very appearance of this tail suggests its use\nas a weapon of defence, and it is said that even the dreaded cerastes\nis conquered by it, when the lizard and the snake happen to find\nthemselves occupants of the same hole.\n\nThe ancients had a very amusing notion respecting the use of the spiny\ntail possessed by the Dhubb and its kin. They had an idea that,\ncomparatively small though it was, it fed upon cattle, and that it was\nable to take them from the herd and drive them to its home. For this\npurpose, when it had selected an ox, it jumped on its back, and by the\npricking of its sharp claws drove the animal to gallop in hope of\nridding himself of his tormentor. In order to guide him in the\ndirection of its home, it made use of its tail, lashing the ox \"to\nmake him go with his rider to the place of his most fit execution,\nfree from all rescue of his herdsman, or pastor, or the annoyance of\npassengers, where, in most cruel and savage manner, he teareth the\nlimbs and parts one from another till he be devoured.\"\n\nThis very absurd account is headed by an illustration, which, though\nbad in drawing and rude in execution, is yet so bold and truthful that\nthere is no doubt that it was sketched from the living animal.\n\nAs it haunts sandy downs, rocky spots, and similar localities, it is\nwell adapted for the Holy Land, which is the home of a vast number of\nreptiles, especially of those belonging to the lizards. In the summer\ntime they have the full enjoyment of the hot sunbeams, in which they\ndelight, and which seem to rouse these cold-blooded creatures to\naction, while they deprive the higher animals of all spirit and\nenergy. In the winter time these very spots afford localities wherein\nthe lizards can hibernate until the following spring, and in such a\ncase they furnish the reptiles with secure hiding-places.\n\nAlthough the Dhubb does not destroy and tear to pieces oxen and other\ncattle, it is yet a rather bloodthirsty reptile, and will kill and\ndevour birds as large as the domestic fowl. Usually, however, its food\nconsists of beetles and other insects, which it takes deliberately.\n\nWhether or not the Dhubb be the same reptile as the Tzab of the Old\nTestament, the resemblance between the Hebrew and Arabic words is very\nremarkable.\n\n\n\n\nTHE LEVIATHAN OR CROCODILE.\n\n Signification of the word _Leviathan_--Description in the Book\n of Job--Structure and general habits of the Crocodile--The\n throat-valve and its use--Position of the nostrils--Worship of\n the Crocodile--The reptile known in the Holy Land--Two legends\n respecting its presence there--Mode of taking prey--Cunning of\n the Crocodile--The baboons and the Crocodile--Speed of the\n reptile--Eggs and young of the Crocodile, and their\n enemies--Curious story of the ichneumon and ibis--Modes of\n capturing the Crocodile--Analysis of Job's description--The\n Crocodile also signified by the word _Tannin_. Aaron's rod\n changed into a Tannin--Various passages in which the word\n occurs--Use of the word by the prophet Jeremiah.\n\n\nThe word _Leviathan_ is used in a rather loose manner in the Old\nTestament, in some places representing a mammalian of the sea, and in\nothers signifying a reptile inhabiting the rivers. As in the most\nimportant of these passages the Crocodile is evidently signified, we\nwill accept that rendering, and consider the Crocodile as being the\nLeviathan of Scripture. The Jewish Bible accepts the word Crocodile,\nand does not add the mark of doubt.\n\nThe fullest account of the Leviathan occurs in Job xli., the whole of\nwhich chapter is given to the description of the terrible reptile. As\nthe translation of the Jewish Bible differs in some points from that\nof the Authorized Version, I shall here give the former, so that the\nreader may be able to compare them with each other.\n\n\"Canst thou draw out a crocodile with a hook, or his tongue with a\ncord which thou lettest down?\n\n\"Canst thou put a reed into his nose, or bore his jaw through with a\nthorn?\n\n\"Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words\nunto thee?\n\n\"Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him as a servant\nfor ever?\n\n\"Wilt thou play with him as with a bird, or wilt thou bind him for thy\nmaidens?\n\n\"Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among\nthe merchants?\n\n\"Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons, or his head with\nfish-spears?\n\n\"Lay thine hand upon him, thou wilt no more remember the battle.\n\n\"Behold, the hope of him is in vain; shall not one be cast down at the\nsight of him?\n\n\"None is so fierce that dare stir him up; who then is able to stand\nbefore Me?\n\n\"Who hath forestalled Me that I should repay him? whatsoever is under\nthe whole heaven is Mine.\n\n\"I will not be silent of his parts, nor of the matter of his power,\nnor of his comely proportion.\n\n\"Who can uncover the face of his garment? who would enter the double\nrow in his jaw?\n\n\"Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round\nabout.\n\n\"The strength of his shields are his pride, shut up together as with a\nclose seal.\n\n\"One is so near to another that no air can come between them.\n\n\"They are joined one to another, they stick together that they cannot\nbe sundered.\n\n\"His snortings make light to shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids\nof the morning dawn.\n\n\"Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.\n\n\"His breath kindleth live coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.\n\n\"In his neck abideth strength, and before him danceth terror.\n\n\"The flakes of his flesh are joined together, they are firm in\nthemselves; yea, as hard as nether millstone.\n\n\"When he raiseth himself up, the mighty are afraid; by reason of\nbreakings they lose themselves.\n\n\"The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart,\nnor the habergeon.\n\n\"He esteemeth iron as straw, and copper as rotten wood.\n\n\"The arrow cannot make him flee: sling-stones are turned with him into\nstubble.\n\n\"Clubs are counted as stubble; he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.\n\n\"His under parts are like sharp points of potsherd; he speaketh sharp\npoints upon the mire.\n\n\"He maketh the deep to boil like a pot; he maketh the sea like a pot\nof ointment.\n\n\"He maketh a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be\nhoary.\n\n\"Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.\n\n\"He beholdeth all high things; he is a king over all the children of\npride.\"\n\nThis splendid description points as clearly to the Crocodile as the\ndescription of the Behemoth which immediately precedes it does to the\nhippopotamus, and it is tolerably evident that the sacred poet who\nwrote these passages must have been personally acquainted with both\nthe Crocodile and the hippopotamus. In both descriptions there are a\nfew exaggerations, or rather, poetical licences. For example, the\nbones of the hippopotamus are said to be iron and copper, and the\nCrocodile is said to kindle live coals with his breath. These,\nhowever, are but the natural imagery of an Oriental poet, and,\nconsidering the subject, we may rather wonder that the writer has not\nintroduced even more fanciful metaphors.\n\n\nBefore proceeding with the Biblical portion of the history of this\nformidable reptile, I will mention a few points connected with the\nCrocodile and its kin. There are several species of Crocodile in\ndifferent parts of the world, ten species at least being known to\nscience. Some inhabit India, some tropical America, some Asia, and\nsome Africa, so that the genus is represented in nearly all the warmer\nparts of the world.\n\nThey are all known by the formation of the teeth, the lower canines\nfitting each into a notch on the side of the upper jaw. The feet are\nwebbed to the tips, and though the reptile mostly propels itself\nthrough the water by means of its tail, it can also paddle itself\ngently along by means of its feet. The teeth are all made for\nsnatching and tearing, but not for masticating, the Crocodile\nswallowing its prey entire when possible; and when the animal is too\nlarge to be eaten entire, the reptile tears it to pieces, and swallows\nthe fragments without attempting to masticate them.\n\nIn order to enable it to open its mouth under water, the back of its\nthroat is furnished with a very simple but beautiful contrivance,\nwhereby the water is received on a membranous valve, and, in\nproportion to its pressure, closes the orifice of the throat. As the\nCrocodiles mostly seize their prey in their open jaws and hold it\nunder water until devoured, it is evident that without such a\nstructure as has been described the Crocodile would be as likely to\ndrown itself as its prey. But the throat-valve enables it to keep its\nmouth open while the water is effectually prevented from running down\nits throat, and the nostrils, placed at the end of the snout, enable\nit to breathe at its ease, while the unfortunate animal which it has\ncaptured is being drowned beneath the surface of the water.\n\nThis position of the nostrils serves another purpose, and enables the\nCrocodile to breathe while the whole of its body is under the water,\nand only an inch or two of the very end of the snout is above the\nsurface. As, moreover, the Crocodile, as is the case with most\nreptiles, is able to exist for a considerable time without breathing,\nit only needs to protrude its nostrils for a few moments, and can then\nsink entirely beneath the water. In this way the reptile is able to\nconceal itself in case it should suspect danger; and as, in such\ninstances, it dives under the herbage of the river, and merely thrusts\nits nose into the air among the reeds and rashes, it is evident that,\nin spite of its enormous size, it baffles the observation of almost\nevery foe.\n\nThe Crocodile is one of the many animals to which divine honours were\npaid by the Egyptians. This we learn from several sources. Herodotus,\nfor example, in \"Euterpe,\" chapter 69, writes as follows: \"Those who\ndwell about Thebes and Lake Moeris, consider them to be very sacred;\nand they each of them train up a Crocodile, which is taught to be\nquite tame; and they put crystal and gold ear-rings into their ears,\nand bracelets on their fore-paws; and they give them appointed and\nsacred food, and treat them as well as possible while alive, and when\ndead, they embalm them, and bury them in sacred vaults.\n\n\"But the people who dwell about the city of Elephantine eat them, not\nconsidering them as sacred.\"\n\nThe reasons for this worship are several. At the root of them all lies\nthe tendency of man to respect that which he fears rather than that\nwhich he loves; and the nearer the man approaches the savage state,\nthe more is this feeling developed. By this tendency his worship is\nregulated, and it will be found that when man is sufficiently advanced\nto be capable of worship at all, his reverence is invariably paid to\nthe object which has the greatest terrors for him. The Crocodile,\ntherefore, being the animal that was most dreaded by the ancient\nEgyptians, was accepted as the natural type of divinity.\n\nBy degrees, though the worship of the Crocodile was retained, the\nworshippers thought themselves obliged to find reasons for their\nveneration, and some of them said that they considered the Crocodile a\ntype of divinity because it had no tongue, and was therefore an emblem\nof divine power, which requires no tongue wherewith to speak. \"For by\na mute and silent way it ascendeth, and bringeth all things mortal to\na vocal justice, which speaketh in action, though not in voyce, even\nas all that is in the Crocodile is action and not voyce.\"\n\nSome said that they reverenced the Crocodile because it laid\nthreescore eggs and lived threescore years, this being the span of\nhuman life. Others, and these give by far the best reason, say that\ndivine honours are paid to the Crocodile because the time of laying\nthe eggs and hatching the young foreshows the annual rising of the\nNile, on which depends the prosperity of the whole country. Still\nthere is no doubt that, whatever explanations may have been offered by\nthe advocates of Crocodile worship, the true reason for it was nothing\nbut the terror inspired by the animal.\n\n\nOwing to the accuracy of the description in the Book of Job, which is\nevidently written by one who was personally acquainted with the\nCrocodile, it is thought by many commentators that the writer must\nhave been acquainted with the Nile, in which river both the Crocodile\nand hippopotamus are found at the present day.\n\nIt is possible, however, that the hippopotamus and the Crocodile have\nhad at one time a much wider range than they at present enjoy. Even\nwithin the memory of man the hippopotamus has been driven further and\nfurther up the Nile by the encroachments of man. It has long been said\nthat even at the present day the Crocodile exists in Palestine in the\nriver which is called \"Nhar Zurka,\" which flows from Samaria through\nthe plains of Sharon. Several of the older writers have mentioned its\nexistence in this river, and, since this work was commenced, the\nlong-vexed question has been set at rest; a Crocodile, eight feet in\nlength, having been captured in the Nhar Zurka.\n\nIn her \"Domestic Life in Palestine,\" Miss Rogers gives an old legend\nby which the people account for the presence of Crocodiles in this\nriver. Many ages ago there dwelt upon the bank of the river an old man\nand his two sons, the elder of whom was idle and profligate, while the\nyounger was industrious and virtuous.\n\nThe father died, and left them each an equal share of his wealth--the\nflocks and herds which fed on the rich banks of the river. In process\nof time, the elder brother wasted all his property by riotous living\nand neglect, while the younger brother had greatly increased his\nflocks and herds, and had become a wealthy man. The elder, being\njealous of his brothers prosperity, sought in his mind how to do him\nan injury. Accordingly, he travelled to Egypt, brought some young\nCrocodiles thence, and turned them into the river, hoping that they\nwould destroy his brother's flocks as they came to drink.\n\nSome time afterwards, he went down to the river, and, as he had been\naccustomed to do, descended to the water to wash, when the Crocodiles\nseized him, dragged him into the water, and devoured him.\n\nThis is one legend. Another states that many years ago a colony of\nEgyptians had settled on the bank of the Nhar Zurka, and that they,\nbeing worshippers of the Crocodile, brought some of the young from the\nNile and established them in the river, which thenceforward bore the\nname of Nhar Zurka, or the Crocodile River. The reader will doubtless\nhave noticed that in both these legends the Crocodile is said to be an\nimportation from the Nile, and is not held to be indigenous to the\nriver.\n\nAllusion is made in the former of these two legends to the mode in\nwhich the Crocodile seizes its prey. It does not attack it openly,\nneither, as some have said, does it go on shore for that purpose. It\nwatches to see whether any animal comes to drink, and then, sinking\nbeneath the surface of the water, dives rapidly, rises unexpectedly\nbeneath the unsuspecting victim, seizes it with a sudden snap of its\nhuge jaws, and drags it beneath the water. Should the intended prey be\ntoo far from the water to be reached by the mouth, or so large that it\nmay offer a successful resistance, the Crocodile strikes it a\ntremendous blow with its tail, and knocks it into the water. The\ndwellers on the Nile bank say that a large Crocodile will with a\nsingle blow of its tail break all the four legs of an ox or a horse.\n\nThese cunning reptiles even contrive to catch birds as they come for\nwater. On the banks of the Nile the smaller birds drink in a very\npeculiar manner. They settle in numbers on the flexible branches that\noverhang the stream, and when, by their weight, the branch bends\ndownwards, they dip their beaks in the water. The Crocodile sees afar\noff a branch thus loaded, swims as near as possible, and then dives\nuntil it can see the birds immediately above it, when it rises\nsuddenly, and with a snap of its jaws secures a whole mouthful of the\nunsuspecting birds.\n\nSir S. Baker, in his travels on the Nile, gave much attention to the\nCrocodile, and has collected a great amount of interesting information\nabout the reptile, much of which is peculiarly valuable, inasmuch as\nit illustrates the Scriptural notices of the creature. He states that\nit is a very crafty animal, and that its usual mode of attack is by\nfirst showing itself, then swimming slowly away to a considerable\ndistance, so as to make its intended victim think that danger is over,\nand then returning under water. It is by means of this manoeuvre that\nit captures the little birds. It first makes a dash at them,\nopen-mouthed, causing them to take to flight in terror. It then sails\nslowly away as if it were so baffled that it did not intend to renew\nthe attack. When it is at a considerable distance, the birds think\nthat their enemy has departed, and return to the branch, which they\ncrowd more than ever, and in a minute or two several dozen of them are\nengulfed in the mouth of the Crocodile, which has swiftly dived under\nthem.\n\nOn one occasion, Sir S. Baker was walking near the edge of the river,\nwhen he heard a great shrieking of women on the opposite bank. It\nturned out that a number of women had been filling their \"gerbas\"\n(water-skins), when one of them was suddenly attacked by a large\nCrocodile. She sprang back, and the reptile, mistaking the filled\ngerba for a woman, seized it, and gave the owner time to escape. It\nthen dashed at the rest of the women, but only succeeded in seizing\nanother gerba.\n\n [Illustration: THE CROCODILE, THE LEVIATHAN OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish\n spears.\"--JOB xli. 7.]\n\nA short time previously a Crocodile, thought by the natives to be the\nsame individual, had seized a woman and carried her off; and another\nhad made an attack on a man in a very curious manner. A number\nof men were swimming across the river, supported, after their\ncustom, on gerbas inflated with air, when one of them felt himself\nseized by the leg by a Crocodile, which tried to drag him under water.\nHe, however, retained his hold on the skin, and his companions also\ngrasped his arms and hair with one hand, while with the other they\nstruck with their spears at the Crocodile. At last they succeeded in\ndriving the reptile away, and got their unfortunate companion to land,\nwhere they found that the whole of the flesh was stripped from the leg\nfrom the knee downwards. The poor man died shortly afterwards.\n\nThese crafty reptiles also try to catch the baboons by lying in wait\nfor them at their drinking places; but the baboons are generally more\nthan a match for the Crocodile in point of cunning and quickness of\nsight. Sir S. Baker witnessed an amusing example of such an attempt\nand its failure.\n\n\"The large tamarind-trees on the opposite bank are generally full of\nthe dog-faced baboons (_Cynocephalus_) at their drinking hour. I\nwatched a large Crocodile creep slily out of the water and lie in\nwaiting among the rocks at the usual drinking place before they\narrived, but the baboons were too wide awake to be taken in so easily.\n\n\"A young fellow was the first to discover the enemy. He had\naccompanied several wise and experienced old hands to the extremity of\na bough that at a considerable height overhung the river; from this\npost they had a bird's eye view, and reconnoitred before one of the\nnumerous party descended to drink. The sharp eyes of the young one at\nonce detected the Crocodile, who matched in colour so well with the\nrocks that most probably a man would not have noticed it until too\nlate.\n\n\"At once the young one commenced shaking the bough and screaming with\nall his might, to attract the attention of the Crocodile and to induce\nit to move. In this he was immediately joined by the whole party, who\nyelled in chorus, while the large old males bellowed defiance, and\ndescended to the lowest branches within eight or ten feet of the\nCrocodile. It was of no use--the pretender never stirred, and I\nwatched it until dark. It remained still in the same place, waiting\nfor some unfortunate baboon whose thirst might provoke his fate, but\nnot one was sufficiently foolish, although the perpendicular bank\nprevented them from drinking except at that particular spot.\"\n\nIt may be imagined that if the Crocodile were to depend entirely for\nits food upon the animals that it catches on the bank or in the river,\nit would run a risk of starving. The fact is, that its principal food\nconsists of fish, which it can chase in the water. The great speed at\nwhich the Crocodile darts through the water is not owing to its webbed\nfeet, but to its powerful tail, which is swept from side to side, and\nthus propels the reptile after the manner of a man \"sculling\" a boat\nwith a single oar in the stern. The whales and the fishes have a\nsimilar mode of propulsion.\n\nOn land, the tail is the Crocodile's most formidable weapon. It is one\nmass of muscle and sinew, and the force of its lateral stroke is\nterrible, sweeping away every living thing that it may meet.\nFortunately for its antagonists, the Crocodile can turn but very\nslowly, so that, although it can scramble along at a much faster pace\nthan its appearance indicates, there is no great difficulty in\nescaping, provided that the sweep of its tail be avoided. As the\nCrocodile of the Nile attains when adult a length of thirty feet, one\nmoiety of which is taken up by the tail, it may easily be imagined\nthat the power of this weapon can scarcely be exaggerated.\n\nAs if to add to the terrors of the animal, its head, back, and tail\nare shielded by a series of horny scales, which are set so closely\ntogether that the sharpest spear can seldom find its way through them,\nand even the rifle ball glances off, if it strikes them obliquely.\nLike many other reptiles, the Crocodile is hatched from eggs which are\nlaid on shore and vivified by the warmth of the sun.\n\nThese eggs are exceedingly small when compared with the gigantic\nlizard which deposited them, scarcely equalling in dimensions those of\nthe goose. There is now before me an egg of the cayman of South\nAmerica, a fresh-water lizard but little smaller than the Crocodile of\nthe Nile, and this is barely equal in size to an ordinary hen's egg.\nIt is longer in proportion to its width, but the contents of the two\neggs would be as nearly as possible of the same bulk. On the exterior\nit is very rough, having a granulated appearance, not unlike that of\ndried sharkskin, and the shell is exceedingly thin and brittle. The\nlining membrane, however, is singularly thick and tough, so that the\negg is tolerably well defended against fracture.\n\nWhen first hatched, the young Crocodile is scarcely larger than a\ncommon newt, but it attains most formidable dimensions in a very short\ntime. Twenty or thirty eggs are laid in one spot, and, were they not\ndestroyed by sundry enemies, the Crocodiles would destroy every living\ncreature in the rivers. Fortunately, the eggs and young have many\nenemies, chiefly among which is the well-known ichneumon, which\ndiscovers the place where the eggs are laid and destroys them, and\neats any young Crocodiles that it can catch before they succeed in\nmaking their way to the water.\n\nThe old writers were aware of the services rendered by the ichneumon,\nbut, after their wont, exaggerated them by additions of their own,\nsaying that the ichneumon enters into the mouth of the Crocodile as it\nlies asleep, and eats its way through the body, \"putting the Crocodile\nto exquisite and intolerable torment, while the Crocodile tumbleth to\nand fro, sighing and weeping, now in the depth of water, now on the\nland, never resting till strength of nature faileth. For the incessant\ngnawing of the ichneumon so provoketh her to seek her rest in the\nunrest of every part, herb, element, throws, throbs, rollings, but all\nin vain, for the enemy within her breatheth through her breath, and\nsporteth herself in the consumption of those vital parts which waste\nand wear away by yielding to unpacificable teeth, one after another,\ntill she that crept in by stealth at the mouth, like a puny thief,\ncomes out at the belly like a conqueror, through a passage opened by\nher own labour and industry.\"\n\nThe author has in the long passage, a part of which is here quoted,\nmentioned that the ichneumon takes its opportunity of entering the\njaws of the Crocodile as it lies with its mouth open against the beams\nof the sun. It is very true that the Crocodile does sleep with its\nmouth open; and, in all probability, the older observers, knowing that\nthe ichneumon did really destroy the eggs and young of the Crocodile,\nonly added a little amplification, and made up their minds that it\nalso destroyed the parents. The same writer who has lately been quoted\nranks the ibis among the enemies of the Crocodile, and says that the\nbird affects the reptile with such terror that, if but an ibis's\nfeather be laid on its back, the Crocodile becomes rigid and unable\nto move. The Arabs of the present time say that the water-tortoises\nare enemies to the eggs, scratching them out of the sand and eating\nthem.\n\n\nWe will now pass to the description of the Crocodile in the Book of\nJob.\n\nIn the beginning of that description, Job is asked in irony whether he\ncan draw out Leviathan with a hook, or bore his jaw with a thorn. This\nis probably in allusion, not so much to the size and strength of the\nCrocodile, as to its cunning. At the present time the Arabs of the\nNile assert that to catch a Crocodile with a hook is impossible. Mr.\nLowth suggested to his boatmen that, if a large hook were baited with\nmeat, a Crocodile might be caught. Yusef eagerly denied the\npossibility of such a capture: \"Him too clever--crocodile looking out\nof his eye so\" (making a squint)--\"he see everything like one man, as\ncrocodile like man--people thinking him was one man long time, very\nlong time.\"\n\nAccording to Herodotus, however, the Egyptians did take the Crocodile\nwith a hook, which they first baited with a small pig, and let into\nthe river, and then beat another pig so as to make it scream. The\nCrocodile, hearing the cries of the pig, swims to seize its prey, and\nswallows the baited hook instead of the living pig. As soon as it is\ncaught, the hunters draw it on shore, and when it tries to attack\nthem, they throw sand into its eyes so as to blind it. It is\nremarkable that the Arab hunters of the Nile still employ sand as\ntheir best defensive weapon when they have harpooned a hippopotamus\nand dragged it to the bank. The animal, finding that it cannot\nretreat, charges into the men, who repel it by throwing sand into its\neyes.\n\nThe expression \"boring his jaw with a thorn\" probably refers to the\nfishermen's universal custom of stringing together the captured fish\nby a twig passed through the mouth. In the late Mr. Waterton's\n\"Wanderings\" there is an account of the method employed by the natives\nin catching the cayman, which is the Crocodile of tropical America. A\nsteel hook was tried and found useless, but one of the natives made in\na short time an ingenious hook, composed of four sharpened wooden\nspikes, with which he succeeded in catching the reptile, thus\nliterally boring its jaw with a thorn.\n\nAllusion is made to the impenetrable character of the scale in verses\n7, 15, 16, 17, and from verses 26 to 30. Verse 8 is given better in\nthe Jewish Bible than in the Authorized Version. \"Lay thine hand upon\nhim, thou wilt no more remember the battle.\" The same may be said of\nverse 22, which is thus rendered in the Authorized Version: \"In his\nneck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him.\"\nThe marginal reading gives the last verse as \"sorrow rejoiceth.\"\nNeither of these expressions is very intelligible, but the rendering\nof the Jewish Bible is not only clear, but forcible. \"In his neck\nabideth strength, and before him danceth terror.\"\n\nIn verse 13 the marginal translation is nearly the correct one: \"Who\ncan come to him within his double bridle?\" and the Jewish Bible gives\nthe real meaning of the passage, showing that allusion is made to the\ndouble rows of teeth in both jaws, those of the upper interlacing into\nthose of the lower. \"Who would enter the double (row) in his jaw?\"\nthis reading being carried out by the following verse: \"Who can open\nthe doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about\" (Jewish\nBible).\n\nThe quick sight of the Crocodile is mentioned in verse 18, his eyelids\nbeing compared to the \"eyes of the morning,\" this metaphor being\nfurther illustrated by the hieroglyphs, wherein the eye of the\nCrocodile is employed as the emblem of day-dawn. The impossibility of\ndomesticating this terrible reptile is shown in verses 4 and 5: \"Will\nhe make many supplications unto thee? Will he speak soft words unto\nthee?\n\n\"Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy\nmaidens?\"\n\nAllusion is evidently made to the disagreeable nature of its flesh,\nwhich is penetrated with a strong musky odour, in verse 6: \"Shall the\ncompanions make a banquet of him? Shall they part him among the\nmerchants?\"\n\nAnd lastly, the foam raised by the lashing of the Crocodile's mighty\ntail, and the wake that is left behind it as it urges itself through\nthe water, are mentioned in verses 31 and 32.\n\n\nIt is not unlikely that the word Leviathan also signified any of the\nlarger inhabitants of the waters, whether marine or reptile, and that\na whale or a Crocodile would be equally called by that name. In this\nsense we must interpret the well-known passage, Ps. civ. 24-26:\n\n\"O Lord, how manifold are Thy works! in wisdom hast Thou made them\nall: the earth is full of Thy riches.\n\n\"So is this great and wide sea\" (_i.e._ the Mediterranean), \"wherein\nare things creeping innumerable, both small and great beasts.\n\n\"There go the ships: there is that Leviathan, whom Thou hast made to\nplay therein.\" In this passage the writer points to some large\ninhabitant of the Mediterranean, or the Great Sea, as it is called in\nScripture, to distinguish it from the Sea of Galilee, and the only\ncreature which would answer to the allusion must be one of the larger\ncetacean.\n\n\nWe also find that the Crocodile must be signified by the Hebrew word\n_tannin_, which occurs in several parts of Scripture, and which is\nsometimes translated as \"dragon,\" and sometimes as \"serpent,\" and\nsometimes as \"whale.\" For example, in Exod. vii. 10, we find the\nwell-known passage which relates the changing of Aaron's rod into a\nTannin, or serpent, as the Authorized Version translates it. The\nJewish Bible, however, simply renders the word as \"huge creature.\"\nNext, we come to Deut. xxxii. 33: \"Their wine is the poison of\ndragons, and the cruel venom of asps.\" This passage is rendered in the\nJewish Bible as \"Their wine is the fury of huge creatures, and the\ncruel venom [or head] of asps.\"\n\nThe same word occurs in Job vii. 12: \"Am I a sea, or a whale\n[_tannin_], that thou settest a watch over me?\" We also find it in\nJer. ix. 11: \"And I will make Jerusalem heaps, and a den of dragons\n[_tannin_];\" and the same image is repeated in x. 22: \"Behold, the\nnoise of the bruit is come, and a great commotion out of the north\ncountry, to make the cities of Judah desolate, and a den of dragons.\"\nThe same prophet again repeats the word in xiv. 6: \"The wild asses did\nstand in the high places, they snuffed up the wind like dragons.\"\n\nThere is nothing in any of these passages which would give any clue as\nto the creature that was signified by the word _tannin_, but we obtain\na clue to it in Ezek. xxix. 2-5: \"Son of man, set thy face against\nPharaoh king of Egypt, and prophesy against him, and against all\nEgypt:\n\n\"Speak, and say, Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I am against thee,\nPharaoh king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his\nrivers, which hath said, My river is mine own, and I have made it for\nmyself.\n\n\"But I will put hooks in thy jaws, and T will cause the fish of thy\nrivers to stick unto thy scales; and I will bring thee up out of the\nmidst of thy rivers, and all the fish of thy rivers shall stick unto\nthy scales.\n\n\"And I will leave thee thrown into the wilderness, thee and all the\nfish of thy rivers: thou shalt fall upon the open fields; thou shalt\nnot be brought together nor gathered: I have given thee for meat to\nthe beasts of the field, and to the fowls of the heaven.\"\n\nSee also xxxii. 2, 3: \"Son of man, take up a lamentation for Pharaoh\nking of Egypt, and say unto him, Thou art like a young lion of the\nnations, and thou art as a whale [_tannin_] in the seas; and thou\ncamest forth with thy rivers, and troubledst the waters with thy feet,\nand fouledst their rivers.\n\n\"Thus saith the Lord God, I will therefore spread out my net over thee\nwith a company of many people; and they shall bring thee up in my\nnet.\"\n\nThere is a peculiar significance in the comparison of Pharaoh to the\nCrocodile. It is the master and terror of the Nile, of whom all\nanimals stand in fear. It is ravenous, crafty, fierce, and relentless,\nkeen-eyed to espy prey, and swift to devour it. Yet, in spite of all\nthese evil qualities, the Egyptians venerated it, pampered it, hung it\nwith costly jewels, and paid divine honours to it, exactly as they\nconsidered their despotic sovereign as a demigod during his life, and\nhonoured him with an apotheosis after his death.\n\nLike the Crocodile, secure in his scaly armour, Pharaoh thought\nhimself invincible, but, though man could not conquer him, God could\ndo so. Man could not \"put a hook into his nose, or bore his jaws\nthrough with a thorn\" (Job xli. 2); but the Lord could \"put hooks in\nhis jaws, and bring him up out of the midst of his rivers, and give\nhim for meat to the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven.\"\n\nTaking also the Tannin of Exod. vii. to be the Crocodile, we see how\nappropriate were all the circumstances. The miracle was performed in\nthe presence of Pharaoh, who is afterwards spoken of under the emblem\nof the \"dragon (_tannin_) that lieth in the midst of the river.\" The\nrod of the future high priest of the Lord was changed into the\nCrocodile, which was worshipped by the Egyptian priests and magicians;\nand when they imitated the miracle, Aaron's rod swallowed up those of\nthe heathen in token that the Lord would destroy idolatry.\n\nIt is worthy of mention here that, although in the Authorized Version\nof the Scriptures, the rods of both Moses and Aaron are mentioned as\nhaving been changed into serpents, the words which are translated as\nserpents are different. The rod of Aaron, the priest, was turned into\na Tannin, _i.e._ Crocodile; that of Moses, the lawgiver, into a\nNachash or serpent.\n\nThere is one passage which seems to imply that the word _tannin_ may\nsignify a cetacean. It occurs in Lam. iv. 3: \"Even the sea-monsters\n[_tannin_] draw out the breast, they give suck to their young ones.\"\nIf the sacred writers were aware that the cetaceans were mammals and\nsuckled their young, and that the Crocodile left its offspring to find\nfood for themselves, there would be no doubt on the subject. But it is\nnot at all likely that the Prophet Jeremiah, his soul torn by the\ncrimes of his country and the calamities which he foresaw, persecuted\nby his own people, his life endangered by the forebodings that he was\ncompelled to utter, imprisoned, exiled, and at last dying in a strange\nland, would have been versed in natural history, or would have\ntroubled himself to inquire as to the manner in which the young of the\nCrocodile were fed. The sense of the passage is plain enough, and\ncontains a rebuke to the people in that they neglect their children,\nand were worse than the ferocious inhabitants of the water, as we\nshall see on reading the whole of the passage: \"Even the sea-monster\ndraws out the breast; they give suck to their young ones: the daughter\nof my people is become cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness.\n\n\"The tongue of the sucking child cleaveth to the roof of his mouth for\nthirst; the young children ask bread, and no man breaketh it unto\nthem.\"\n\n\n\n\nTHE LET\u00c2\u00c2H OR LIZARD.\n\n Difficulty of identifying the Let\u00e2\u00e2h--Probability that it is a\n collective and not a specific term--Various Lizards of\n Palestine--The Green or Jersey Lizard--The Cyprius, its\n appearance and habits--The Glass Snake or\n Scheltopusic--Translation of the word _chomet_--Probability that\n it signifies the Skink--Medicinal uses of the Lizard--The Seps\n tribe--The common Cicigna, and the popular belief concerning its\n habits--The Sph\u00e6nops and its shallow tunnel.\n\n\nIn Leviticus xi. 30, the word Lizard is used as the rendering of the\nHebrew word _let\u00e2\u00e2h_ (pronounced as L't\u00e2h-\u00e2h). There are one or two\ndifficulties about the word, but, without going into the question of\netymology, which is beside the object of this work, it will be\nsufficient to state that the best authorities accept the rendering,\nand that in the Jewish Bible the word Lizard is retained, but with the\nmark of doubt appended to it.\n\nIn all probability, the sacred lawgiver employs the word _let\u00e2\u00e2h_ as a\ngeneral term; so that, although he prohibits certain Lizards by name,\nas having been used for food by the various nations with whom the\nIsraelites were necessarily brought in contact during their captivity,\ntheir wanderings, and their final conquest of Palestine, he implies\nthat the whole of the Lizard tribe are to be considered as unfit to be\neaten by the chosen people.\n\nWe shall presently examine some of those which are prohibited by name,\nand it will be sufficient in the present case to glance at the Lizard\ntribes of Egypt, Palestine, and Syria.\n\nThese lands absolutely swarm with Lizards. Even in our own country,\nLizards are far more common than is generally known. I have caused the\ngreatest surprise in an agricultural county by catching and showing to\nthe field-labourers the common Scaly Lizard (_Zootoca vivipara_). The\nlittle reptile was exceedingly plentiful, and yet not one of the\nlabourers, nor even their employers, had seen it.\n\nIn warmer parts of the earth, the Lizards are so numerous and so\ncomparatively large that they force themselves upon the notice. For\nexample, the well-known GREEN or JERSEY LIZARD (_Lacerta viridis_) is\nexceedingly plentiful, and may be seen darting among the leaves in\nsearch of prey, after the erratic manner of Lizards generally, which\nwill remain absolutely motionless for hours together, then whisk about\nso rapidly that the eye can scarcely follow their movements, and\nsubside into quiescence as suddenly as they started from it.\n\n [Illustration: THE CYPRIUS, OR LIZARD OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_And the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail,\n and the mole._\"--LEVIT. xi. 30.]\n\nIn many parts of the world, especially in France, where the terror\ninspired by nearly all reptiles is really ludicrous, this beautiful\nand harmless creature is feared as if it were a venomous serpent, and,\nto judge from experience, I doubt whether a cobra or a rattlesnake\nwould excite more horror than a Green Lizard.\n\n\nA very common species of Lizard, and therefore likely to be one of\nthose which are grouped under the common name of Let\u00e2\u00e2h, is the\nCyprius (_Plestiodon auratum_). This handsome Lizard is golden-yellow\nin colour, beautifully spotted with orange and scarlet, and may be\ndistinguished, even when the colours have fled after death, by the\ncuriously formed ears, which are strongly toothed in front. It is very\nplentiful in Palestine, and, like others of its kin, avoids cultivated\ntracts, and is generally found on rocky and sandy soil which cannot be\ntilled. It is active, and, if alarmed, hides itself quickly in the\nsand or under stones.\n\nIt belongs to the great family of the Skinks, many of which, like the\nfamiliar blind-worm of our own country, are without external legs,\nand, though true Lizards, progress in a snake-like manner, and are\ngenerally mistaken for snakes. One of these is the GLASS SNAKE or\nSCHELTOPUSIC (_Pseudopus pallasii_), which has two very tiny hind\nlegs, but which is altogether so snake-like that it is considered by\nthe natives to be really a serpent. They may well be excused for their\nerror, as the only external indications of limbs are a pair of\nslightly-projecting scales at the place where the hind legs would be\nin a fully-developed Lizard.\n\nThough tolerably plentiful, the Scheltopusic is not very often seen,\nas it is timid and wary, and, when it suspects danger, glides away\nsilently into some place of safety. When adult, the colour of this\nLizard is usually chestnut, profusely mottled with black or deep\nbrown, the edge of each scale being of the darker colour. It feeds\nupon insects and small reptiles, and has been known to devour a nest\nfull of young birds.\n\n\nIn Levit. xi. 30 is a Hebrew word, _chomet_, which is given in the\nAuthorized Version as SNAIL. There is, however, no doubt that the word\nis wrongly translated, and that by it some species of Lizard is\nsignified. The Jewish Bible follows the Authorized Version, but\naffixes the mark of doubt to the word. There is another word,\n_shablul_, which undoubtedly does signify the snail, and will be\nmentioned in its proper place.\n\nIt is most probable that the word _chomet_ includes, among other\nLizards, many of the smaller Skinks which inhabit Palestine. Among\nthem we may take as an example the COMMON SKINK (_Scincus\nofficinalis_), a reptile which derives its specific name from the fact\nthat it was formerly used in medicine, together with mummy, and the\nother disgusting ingredients which formed the greater part of the old\nPharmacopoeia.\n\nEven at the present day, it is used for similar purposes in the East,\nand is in consequence captured for the use of physicians, the body\nbeing simply dried in the sun, and then sent to market for sale. It is\nprincipally employed for the cure of sunstroke, nettle-rash,\nsand-blindness, or fever, and both patient and physician have the\ngreatest confidence in its powers. It is said by some European\nphysicians that the flesh of the Skink really does possess medicinal\npowers, and that it has fallen into disrepute chiefly because those\npowers have been exaggerated. In former days, the head and feet were\nthought to possess the greatest efficacy, and were valued accordingly.\n\nLike all its tribe, the Skink loves sandy localities, the soil exactly\nsuiting its peculiar habits. Although tolerably active, it does not\nrun so fast or so far as many other Lizards, and, when alarmed, it has\na peculiar faculty for sinking itself almost instantaneously under the\nsand, much after the fashion of the shore-crabs of our own country.\nIndeed, it is even more expeditious than the crab, which occupies some\nlittle time in burrowing under the wet and yielding sand, whereas the\nSkink slips beneath the dry and comparatively hard sand with such\nrapidity that it seems rather to be diving into a nearly excavated\nburrow than to be scooping a hollow for itself.\n\nThe sand is therefore a place of safety to the Skink, which does not,\nlike the crab, content itself with merely burying its body just below\nthe surface, but continues to burrow, sinking itself in a few seconds\nto the depth of nearly a yard.\n\nThe length of the Skink is about eight inches, and its very variable\ncolour is generally yellowish brown, crossed with several dark bands.\nSeveral specimens, however, are spotted instead of banded with brown,\nwhile some are banded with white, and others are spotted with white.\nIn all, however, the under-surface is silver grey.\n\n\nIt has been thought by several zoologists, that several of the Lizards\nbelonging to the Seps family may be included in the general term of\nChomet.\n\nThis theory is strengthened by the fact that those of the Sepsid\u00e6\nwhich have no visible feet, and which, after the custom of such\nLizards, burrow in the sand, are even at the present day eaten by\nArabs, under the convenient title of Sand-fishes.\n\nSeveral species of the Sepsid\u00e6 inhabit Egypt, Palestine, and Syria,\nand of these we will take two as examples.\n\nThe first is the COMMON SEPS or CICIGNA (_Seps tridactylis_), a nearly\nlegless Lizard, having a very long and snake-like body, and four legs,\nso small and feeble as to be of scarcely any use in locomotion.\n\nIt bears some resemblance to the blindworm of England, feeds on much\nthe same diet, and has similar habits. It is perfectly harmless, its\nteeth being too small, and its jaws too feeble, to hurt any creature\nlarger than those on which it feeds; but, like the blindworm, it is\nmuch dreaded by the ignorant, who believe that it steals upon horses\nand other cattle by night, and bites them as they sleep.\n\nLike other Lizards of its kind, it is one of the sand-lovers, burying\nitself when it suspects danger.\n\n\nThe second example of the Sepsid\u00e6 is one that has its chief home in\nEgypt. This is the CAPISTRATED SPH\u00c6NOPS (_Sph\u00e6nops sepsoides_). This\nreptile is also a burrower, but does not sink so deeply into the sand\nas those Lizards which have just been noticed. Indeed, it scarcely\nburrows deeply enough to cover it, so that with the foot the sand may\nbe scraped off, and the reptile discovered.\n\nSometimes it has recourse to a substitute for a tunnel, and will crawl\nalong the deep rut made by a cart-wheel rather than take the trouble\nof excavating a passage for itself. In consequence of this\npeculiarity, it may generally be found in any ridged ground, such as\nthat which is employed in the cultivation of rice and other grain,\nand, as it prefers to follow the course of the ridges rather than\nleave them, it may be taken without much trouble. It is perfectly\nharmless, and, although when taken it struggles violently to escape,\nit never employs its teeth on the hand that holds it. The colour of\nthe Sph\u00e6nops is pale brown, diversified with a black stripe on either\nside of the muzzle, and a longitudinal series of black dots along the\nbody. The tail is conical and pointed.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CHAMELEON, MONITOR, AND GECKO.\n\n Translation of the word _Koach_--Signification of the word, and\n its applicability to the Chameleon--Power of the reptile's\n grasp--The prehensile tail--Demeanour of the Chameleon on the\n ground--The independent eyes--Its frequent change of\n colour--Mode of taking prey--Strange notions respecting the\n Chameleon--The Monitor, or Land Crocodile--Its habits and use to\n mankind--The Nilotic Monitor, and its habit of destroying the\n eggs and young of the Crocodile--The Gecko or Ferret of\n Scripture.\n\n\nIn Levit. xi. 30 there occurs a word which has caused great trouble to\ncommentators. The word is _koach_ (pronounced as a dissyllable thus,\nko-ach). Primarily, it signifies power and strength, but in this\npassage it signifies the name of some creature which is included in\nthe list of unclean beasts. There is very little doubt that it\nsignifies some species of lizard, and in the Authorized Version it is\nrendered as CHAMELEON. The Jewish Bible accepts the same translation,\nbut appends to it the mark of doubt.\n\nThere are two lizards to which the term may possibly be\napplied--namely, the Chameleon and the Monitor; and, as the Authorized\nVersion of the Scriptures accepts the former interpretation, we will\nfirst describe the Chameleon.\n\n\nThis reptile is very plentiful in the Holy Land, as well as in Egypt,\nso that the Israelites would be perfectly familiar with it, both\nduring their captivity and after their escape. It is but a small\nreptile, and the reader may well ask why a name denoting strength\nshould be given to it. I think that we may find the reason for its\nname in the extraordinary power of its grasp, as it is able, by means\nof its peculiarly-formed feet and prehensile tail, to grasp the\nbranches so tightly that it can scarcely be removed without damage.\n\nI once saw six or seven Chameleons huddled up together, all having\nclasped each other's legs and tails so firmly that they formed a\nbundle that might be rolled along the ground without being broken up.\nIn order to show the extraordinary power of the Chameleon's grasp, I\nhave had a figure drawn from a sketch taken by myself from a specimen\nwhich I kept for several months.\n\n [Illustration: GECKO AND CHAMELEON.\n\n \"_And the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail,\n and the mole._\"--LEVIT. xi. 30.]\n\nWhen the Chameleon wished to pass from one branch to another, it used\nto hold firmly to the branch by the tail and one hind-foot, and\nstretch out its body nearly horizontally, feeling about with the other\nthree feet, as if in search of a convenient resting-place. In this\ncurious attitude it would remain for a considerable time, apparently\nsuffering no inconvenience, though even the spider-monkey would have\nbeen unable to maintain such an attitude for half the length of time.\n\nThe strength of the grasp is really astonishing when contrasted with\nthe size of the reptile, as any one will find who allows the Chameleon\nto grasp his finger, or who tries to detach it from the branch to\nwhich it is clinging. The feet are most curiously made. They are\nfurnished with five toes, which are arranged like those of parrots and\nother climbing birds, so as to close upon each other like the thumb\nand finger of a human hand. They are armed with little yellow claws,\nslightly curved and very sharp, and when they grasp the skin of the\nhand they give it an unpleasantly sharp pinch.\n\nThe tail is as prehensile as that of the spider-monkey, to which the\nChameleon bears a curious resemblance in some of its attitudes, though\nnothing can be more different than the volatile, inquisitive, restless\ndisposition of the spider-monkey and the staid, sober demeanour of the\nChameleon. The reptile has the power of guiding the tail to any object\nas correctly as if there were an eye at the end of the tail. When it\nhas been travelling over the branches of trees, I have often seen it\ndirect its tail to a projecting bud, and grasp it as firmly as if the\nbud had been before and not behind it.\n\nSometimes, when it rests on a branch, it allows the tail to hang down\nas a sort of balance, the tip coiling and uncoiling unceasingly. But,\nas soon as the reptile wishes to move, the tail is tightened to the\nbranch, and at once coiled round it. There really seems to be almost a\nseparate vitality and consciousness on the part of the tail, which\nglides round an object as if it were acting with entire independence\nof its owner.\n\nOn the ground the Chameleon fares but poorly. Its walk is absolutely\nludicrous, and an experienced person might easily fail to identify a\nChameleon when walking with the same animal on a branch. It certainly\nscrambles along at a tolerable rate, but it is absurdly awkward, its\nlegs sprawling widely on either side, and its feet grasping futilely\nat every step. The tail, which is usually so lithe and nimble, is then\nheld stiffly from the body, with a slight curve upwards.\n\nThe eyes are strange objects, projecting far from the head, and each\nacting quite independently of the other, so that one eye may often be\ndirected forwards, and the other backwards. The eyeballs are covered\nwith a thick wrinkled skin, except a small aperture at the tip, which\ncan be opened and closed like our own eyelids.\n\nThe changing colour of the Chameleon has been long known, though there\nare many mistaken ideas concerning it.\n\nThe reptile does not necessarily assume the colour of any object on\nwhich it is placed, but sometimes takes a totally different colour.\nThus, if my Chameleon happened to come upon any scarlet substance, the\ncolour immediately became black, covered with innumerable circular\nspots of light yellow. The change was so instantaneous that, as it\ncrawled on the scarlet cloth, the colour would alter, and the\nfore-part of the body would be covered with yellow spots, while the\nhinder parts retained their dull black. Scarlet always annoyed the\nChameleon, and it tried to escape whenever it found itself near any\nsubstance of the obnoxious hue.\n\nThe normal colour was undoubtedly black, with a slight tinge of grey.\nBut in a short time the whole creature would become a vivid verdigris\ngreen, and, while the spectator was watching it, the legs would become\nbanded with rings of bright yellow, and spots and streaks of the same\ncolour would appear on the head and body.\n\nWhen it was excited either by anger or by expectation--as, for\nexample, when it heard a large fly buzzing near it--the colours were\nsingularly beautiful, almost exactly resembling in hue and arrangement\nthose of the jaguar. Of all the colours, green seemed generally to\npredominate, but the creature would pass so rapidly from one colour to\nanother that it was scarcely possible to follow the various gradations\nof hue.\n\nSome persons have imagined that the variation of colour depends on the\nwants and passions of the animal. This is not the case. The change is\noften caused by mental emotion, but is not dependent on it; and I\nbelieve that the animal has no control whatever over its colour. The\nbest proof of this assertion may be found in the fact that my own\nChameleon changed colour several times after its death; and, indeed,\nas long as I had the dead body before me, changes of hue were taking\nplace.\n\nThe food of the Chameleon consists of insects, mostly flies, which it\ncatches by means of its tongue, which can be protruded to an\nastonishing distance. The tongue is nearly cylindrical, and is\nfurnished at the tip with a slight cavity, which is filled with a very\nglutinous secretion. When the Chameleon sees a fly or other insect, it\ngently protrudes the tongue once or twice, as if taking aim, like a\nbilliard-player with his cue, and then, with a moderately smart\nstroke, carries off the insect on the glutinous tip of the tongue. The\nforce with which the Chameleon strikes is really wonderful. My own\nspecimen used to look for flies from my hand, and at first I was as\nmuch surprised with the force of the blow struck by the tongue as I\nwas with the grasping power of the feet.\n\nAmong the wild legends with which the earlier naturalists adorned\ntheir accounts of all animals with which they were not personally\nfamiliar, those of the Chameleon are not the least curious.\n\"Themselves,\" writes Topsel, an author of the sixteenth century, \"are\nvery gentle, never exasperated but when they are about wilde\nfig-trees.\n\n\"They have for their enemies the serpent, the crow, and the hawk. When\nthe hungry serpent doth assault them, they defend themselves in this\nmanner, as Alexander Mindius writeth. They take in their mouths a\nbroad and strong stalk, under protection of which, as under a buckler,\nthey defend themselves against their enemy the serpent, by reason that\nthe stalk is broader than the serpent can gripe in his mouth, and the\nother parts of the cham\u00e6leon so firm and hard as the serpent cannot\nhurt them: he laboureth but in vain to get a prey, so long as the\nstalk is in the cham\u00e6leon's mouth.\n\n\"But if the cham\u00e6leon at any time see a serpent taking the air, and\nsunning himself under some green tree, he climbeth up into that tree,\nand setteth himself directly over the serpent; then out of his mouth\nhe casteth a thread, like a spider, at the end of which hangeth a drop\nof poyson as bright as any pearl; by this string he letteth down the\npoyson upon the serpent, which, lighting upon it, killeth it\nimmediately.\n\n\"And Scaliger reporteth a greater wonder than this in the description\nof the cham\u00e6leon; for he saith, if the boughs of the tree so grow as\nthe perpendicular line cannot fall directly upon the serpent, then he\nso correcteth and guideth it with his fore-feet that it falleth upon\nthe serpent within the mark of a hair's breadth.\n\n\"The raven and the crow are also at variance with the cham\u00e6leon, and\nso great is the adverse nature betwixt these twain, that if the crow\neat of the cham\u00e6leon being slain by him, he dyeth for it except he\nrecover his life by a bay-leaf, even as the elephant, after he hath\ndevoured a cham\u00e6leon, saveth his life by eating of the wilde\nolive-tree.\n\n\"But the greatest wonder of all is the hostility which Pliny reporteth\nto be betwixt the cham\u00e6leon and the hawk. For he writeth that when a\nhawk flyeth over a cham\u00e6leon, she hath no power to resist the\ncham\u00e6leon, but falleth down before it, yeelding both her life and her\nlimbs to be devoured by it, and thus that devourer that liveth upon\nthe prey and blood of others hath no power to save her own life from\nthis little beast.\"\n\nIt may here be remarked that the frog was said to save itself from the\nwater-ducks by seizing a stick crosswise in its mouth, so that when\nthe duck came to seize its prey, the stick came across the angles of\nthe jaws, and prevented the frog from being swallowed.\n\n\nSo much for the Chameleon. We will now take the NILOTIC MONITOR\n(_Hydrosaurus niloticus_) and the LAND MONITOR (_Psammosaurus\nscincus_), the other reptiles which have been conjectured to be the\nreal representatives of the Koach.\n\nThese lizards attain to some size, the former sometimes measuring six\nfeet in length, and the latter but a foot or so less. Of the two, the\nLand Monitor, being the more common, both in Palestine and Egypt, has\nperhaps the best claim to be considered as the Koach of Scripture. It\nis sometimes called the Land Crocodile. It is a carnivorous animal,\nfeeding upon other reptiles and the smaller mammalia, and is very fond\nof the eggs of the crocodile, which it destroys in great numbers, and\nis in consequence much venerated by the inhabitants of the country\nabout the Nile.\n\nThe theory that this reptile may be the Koach of Leviticus is\nstrengthened by the fact that even at the present day it is cooked and\neaten by the natives, whereas the chameleon is so small and bony that\nscarcely any one would take the trouble of cooking it.\n\nThe Nilotic Monitor shares the same habit of devouring crocodiles'\neggs, and consequently shares the respect of those who are endangered\nby the crocodile. It even eats the young crocodiles after they are\nhatched, chasing them through the water, and capturing them by means\nof its superior swiftness. It may be distinguished from the Land\nMonitor by the elevated keel which runs along the whole of the spine\nfrom the neck to the very end of the long tail. The general colour of\nthe Nilotic Monitor is olive-grey, mottled with black. On the back of\nthe neck are a series of curved bands of a whitish yellow.\n\n\nIt is mentioned on page 69, that the word _an\u00e2kah_, which is\ntranslated as \"ferret\" in Levit. xi. 30, is certainly a lizard, and in\nall probability is one of the Geckos. I have therefore introduced into\nthe same illustration on page 535 the commonest species of Gecko found\nin Palestine. The reader will observe the flat, fan-like expansions at\nthe ends of the toes, by which it is able to adhere to flat surfaces.\n\n\n\n\nSERPENTS.\n\n Serpents in general--Signification of the Hebrew word\n _Nachash_--Various passages in which the Nachash is\n mentioned--The fiery Serpents of the wilderness--Explanation of\n the words \"flying\" and \"fiery\" as applied to Serpents--Haunts of\n the Serpent--The Cobra, or Asp of Scripture--Meaning of the word\n _Pethen_--The deaf Adder that stoppeth her ear--Serpent-charming\n in the East--Principle on which the charmers work--Sluggishness\n of the Serpent nature--Ceremony of initiation into\n Serpent-charming--Theories respecting the deaf Adder--Luis of\n Grenada's sermon--The Cerastes, or Horned Serpent--Appearance\n and habits of the reptile--The \"Adder in the path.\"\n\n\nAs we have seen that so much looseness of nomenclature prevailed among\nthe Hebrews even with regard to the mammalia, birds, and lizards, we\ncan but expect that the names of the Serpents will be equally\ndifficult to identify.\n\nNo less than seven names are employed in the Old Testament to denote\nsome species of Serpent; but there are only two which can be\nidentified with any certainty, four others being left to mere\nconjecture, and one being clearly a word which, like our snake or\nserpent, is a word not restricted to any particular species, but\nsignifying Serpents in general. This word is _n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh_ (pronounced\nnah-kahsh). It is unfortunate that the word is so variously translated\nin different passages of Scripture, and we cannot do better than to\nfollow it through the Old Testament, so as to bring all the passages\nunder our glance.\n\nThe first mention of the N\u00e2ch\u00e2sh occurs in Gen. iii., in the\nwell-known passage where the Serpent is said to be more subtle than\nall the beasts of the field, the wisdom or subtlety of the Serpent\nhaving evidently an allegorical and not a categorical signification.\nWe find the same symbolism employed in the New Testament, the\ndisciples of our Lord being told to be \"wise as serpents, and harmless\nas doves.\"\n\nAllusion is made to the gliding movement of the Serpent tribe in Prov.\nxxx. 19. On this part of the subject little need be said, except that\nthe movements of the Serpent are owing to the mobility of the ribs,\nwhich are pushed forward in succession and drawn back again, so as to\ncatch against any inequality of the ground. This power is increased by\nthe structure of the scales. Those of the upper part of the body,\nwhich are not used for locomotion, are shaped something like the\nscales of a fish; but those of the lower part of the body, which come\nin contact with the ground, are broad belts, each overlapping the\nother, and each connected with one pair of ribs.\n\nWhen, therefore, the Serpent pushes forward the ribs, the edges of the\nscaly belts will catch against the slightest projection, and are able\nto give a very powerful impetus to the body. It is scarcely possible\nto drag a snake backwards over rough ground; while on a smooth\nsurface, such as glass, the Serpent would be totally unable to\nproceed. This, however, was not likely to have been studied by the\nancient Hebrews, who were among the most unobservant of mankind with\nregard to details of natural history: it is, therefore, no wonder that\nthe gliding of the Serpent should strike the writer of the proverb in\nquestion as a mystery which he could not explain.\n\nThe poisonous nature of some of the Serpents is mentioned in several\npassages of Scripture; and it will be seen that the ancient Hebrews,\nlike many modern Europeans, believed that the poison lay in the forked\ntongue. See, for example, Ps. lviii. 4: \"Their poison is like the\npoison of a serpent\" (_n\u00e2ch\u00e2sh_). Also Prov. xxiii. 32, in which the\nsacred writer says of wine that it brings woe, sorrow, contentions,\nwounds without cause, redness of eyes, and that \"at the last it biteth\nlike a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.\"\n\n [Illustration: COBRA AND CERASTES, THE ASP AND ADDER OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n \"_They are like the deaf asp_ (marginal translation) _that stoppeth\n her ear, which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming\n never so wisely._\"--PS. lviii. 4, 5.\n\n \"_Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path._\"--GEN.\n xlix. 17.]\n\nThe idea that the poison of the Serpent lies in the tongue is seen in\nseveral passages of Scripture. \"They have sharpened their tongues like\na serpent; adders' poison is under their lips\" (Ps. cxl. 3). Also in\nJob xx. 16, the sacred writer says of the hypocrite, that \"he shall\nsuck the poison of asps: the viper's tongue shall slay him.\"\n\nAs to the fiery Serpents of the wilderness, it is scarcely needful to\nmention that the epithet of \"fiery\" does not signify that the Serpents\nin question produced real fire from their mouths, but that allusion is\nmade to the power and virulence of their poison, and to the pain\ncaused by their bite. We ourselves naturally employ a similar\nmetaphor, and speak of a \"burning pain,\" of a \"fiery trial,\" of \"hot\nanger,\" and the like.\n\nThe epithet of \"flying\" which is applied to these Serpents is\nexplained by the earlier commentators as having reference to a Serpent\nwhich they called the Dart Snake, and which they believed to lie in\nwait for men and to spring at them from a distance. They thought that\nthis snake hid itself either in hollows of the ground or in trees, and\nsprang through the air for thirty feet upon any man or beast that\nhappened to pass by.\n\n\"And surely if it be lawful to conjecture what kinds of Serpents those\nwere which in the Scripture were called Fiery Serpents, and did sting\nthe Israelites to death in the Wildernesse, until the Brazen Serpent\nwas erected for their cure; among all the Serpents in the world, that\nkind of death and pain can be ascribed to none more properly than to\nthese Cafezati, or Red-dart Serpents.\n\n\"For first, the Wildernesse, which was the place wherein they annoyed\nthe people, doth very well agree to their habitation. Secondly, the\nFiery Serpents are so called by figure, not that they are fiery, but,\nas all Writers do agree, either because they were red like fire; or\nelse because the pain which they inflicted did burn like fire, or\nrather for both these causes together, which are joyntly and severally\nfound in these Red Serpents. And therefore I will conclude for my\nopinion, that these Serpents (as the highest poyson in nature) were\nsent by God to afflict the sinning Israelites, whose poyson was\nuncurable, except by Divine miracle.\"\n\nThe places in which the Serpent is accustomed to lie are mentioned in\nvarious portions of the Old Testament. The habit of lying in hedges is\nmentioned in Ecclesiastes. \"He that diggeth a pit shall fall into it;\nand whoso breaketh an hedge, a serpent shall bite him\" (Eccles. x. 8).\nThe Prophet Amos alludes to its custom of haunting the walls of houses\n(see v. 18, 19): \"The day of the Lord is darkness, and not light.\n\n\"As if a man did flee from a lion, and a bear met him; or went into\nthe house, and leaned his hand on the wall, and a serpent bit him.\"\nThis passage refers also to the ordinary architecture of the East, the\nwalls of common houses, such as those with which a herdman like Amos\nwould be most familiar, being little more than hurdles covered with\nmud. Such walls would soon fall into disrepair, and would be full of\nholes, in which spiders, centipedes, lizards, and serpents hide\nthemselves.\n\n\nWe will now take the various species of Serpents mentioned in the\nBible, as nearly as they can be identified.\n\nOf one species there is no doubt whatever. This is the COBRA (_Naja\nhaje_), a serpent which is evidently signified by the Hebrew word\n_pethen_.\n\nThere are several passages in which this word occurs, nearly all of\nwhich contain some allusion to its poisonous nature, and one of them\nmentioning a characteristic which settles its identity beyond doubt.\n\nIn the very beginning of the Scriptural books we find a reference to\nthe Pethen. The first occurs in Deut. xxxii. 33: \"Their vine is of the\nvine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes\nof gall, their clusters are bitter:\n\n\"Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps\"\n(_pethenim_).\n\nNext we come to the passage in Job xx. 14-16: \"Yet his meat in his\nbowels is turned, it is the gall of asps (_pethenim_) within him.\n\n\"He hath swallowed down riches, and he shall vomit them up again: God\nshall cast them out of his belly.\n\n\"He shall suck the poison of asps (_pethenim_): the viper's (_epheh_)\ntongue shall slay him.\"\n\nThese passages clearly indicate the venomous nature of the Pethen, and\nthere is another which occurs in Isaiah, in which the same quality is\ninferred though not directly stated. It occurs in chap. xi., which is\ndevoted to a prophecy of the spiritual reign of the Messiah, and in\nwhich is found that allusion to Himself which our Lord quoted in the\nTemple (see ver. 2). The passage with which we have now to do occurs\nin verse 8: \"And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp\n(_pethen_), and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice'\nden.\"\n\nWe may also find a passage in the Psalms, in which the Pethen is\nclassed with the lion as being equally to be dreaded by the traveller.\n\"Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder (_pethen_), the young lion\nand the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.\"\n\nAll these passages agree in one point, namely, that the Pethen is a\ncreature the bite of which is exceedingly venomous, but there is\nnothing in them to assist us in identifying it. The Pethen may be, as\nfar as these passages are concerned, any kind of venomous Serpent. But\nthere is just one allusion to the Pethen which enables us to decide at\nonce as to its identity. It occurs in Ps. lviii. 3-5: \"The wicked are\nestranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born,\nspeaking lies.\n\n\"Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf\nadder (_pethen_) that stoppeth her ear;\n\n\"Which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so\nwisely.\" The last verse is rendered rather differently in the Jewish\nBible: \"Which will not hearken to the voice of whisperers, the cunning\nmaster of charms.\"\n\nHere we have a clue to the identification of the Pethen. It is\nevidently a Serpent that was accustomed to be subjected to the action\nof charmers; and as we find that in the olden times and at the present\nday the cobra, a most venomous Serpent, was and is tamed by\nprofessional charmers, there is no doubt that the Egyptian cobra is\nthe Pethen of Scripture. I say the Egyptian cobra, because there is a\nclosely allied species, the cobra of India (_Naja tripudians_), which\nvery much resembles the Naja haje, and which is also tamed by\nserpent-charmers. A passing allusion to this custom in taming Serpents\nis made by St. James in his General Epistle, chap. iii. 7: \"For every\nkind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the\nsea, is tamed, and hath been tamed by mankind:\n\n\"But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly\npoison.\"\n\nHow the serpent-charmers perform their feats is not very intelligible.\nThat they handle the most venomous Serpents with perfect impunity is\nevident enough, and it is also clear that they are able to produce\ncertain effects upon the Serpents by means of musical (or unmusical)\nsounds. But these two items are entirely distinct, and one does not\ndepend upon the other.\n\nIn the first place, the handling of venomous snakes has been\nperformed by Englishmen without the least recourse to any arts except\nthat of acquaintance with the habits of Serpents. The late Mr.\nWaterton, for example, would take up a rattlesnake in his bare hand\nwithout feeling the least uneasy as to the behaviour of his prisoner.\nHe once took twenty-seven rattlesnakes out of a box, carried them into\nanother room, put them into a large glass case, and afterwards\nreplaced them in the box. He described to me the manner in which he\ndid it, using my wrist as the representative of the Serpent.\n\nThe nature of all Serpents is rather peculiar, and is probably owing\nto the mode in which the blood circulates. They are extremely\nunwilling to move, except when urged by the wants of nature, and will\nlie coiled up for many hours together when not pressed by hunger.\nConsequently, when touched, their feeling is evidently like that of a\ndrowsy man, who only tries to shake off the object which may rouse\nhim, and composes himself afresh to sleep.\n\nA quick and sudden movement would, however, alarm the reptile, which\nwould strike in self-defence, and, sluggish as are its general\nmovements, its stroke is delivered with such lightning rapidity that\nit would be sure to inflict its fatal wound before it was seized. If,\ntherefore, Mr. Waterton saw a Serpent which he desired to catch, he\nwould creep very quietly up to it, and with a gentle, slow movement\nplace his fingers round its neck just behind the head. If it happened\nto be coiled up in such a manner that he could not get at its neck, he\nhad only to touch it gently until it moved sufficiently for his\npurpose.\n\nWhen he had once placed his hand on the Serpent, it was in his power.\nHe would then grasp it very lightly indeed, and raise it gently from\nthe ground, trusting that the reptile would be more inclined to be\ncarried quietly than to summon up sufficient energy to bite. Even if\nit had tried to use its fangs, it could not have done so as long as\nits captor's fingers were round its neck.\n\nAs a rule, a great amount of provocation is needed before a venomous\nSerpent will use its teeth. One of my friends, when a boy, caught a\nviper, mistaking it for a common snake. He tied it round his neck,\ncoiled it on his wrist by way of a bracelet, and so took it home,\nplaying many similar tricks with it as he went. After arrival in the\nhouse, he produced the viper for the amusement of his brothers and\nsisters, and, after repeating his performances, tried to tie the snake\nin a double knot. This, however, was enough to provoke the most\npacific of creatures, and in consequence he received a bite on his\nfinger.\n\nThere is no doubt that the snake-charmers trust chiefly to this\nsluggish nature of the reptile, but they certainly go through some\nceremonies by which they believe themselves to be rendered impervious\nto snake-bites. They will coil the cobra round their naked bodies,\nthey will irritate the reptile until it is in a state of fury; they\nwill even allow it to bite them, and yet be none the worse for the\nwound. Then, as if to show that the venomous teeth have not been\nabstracted, as is possibly supposed to be the case, they will make the\ncobra bite a fowl, which speedily dies from the effects of the poison.\n\nEven if the fangs were extracted, the Serpents would lose little of\ntheir venomous power. These reptiles are furnished with a whole series\nof fangs in different stages of development, so that when the one in\nuse is broken or shed in the course of nature, another comes forward\nand fills its place. There is now before me a row of four fangs, which\nI took from the right upper jawbone of a viper caught in the New\nForest.\n\nIn her interesting \"Letters from Egypt,\" Lady Duff-Gordon gives an\namusing account of the manner in which she was formally initiated into\nthe mysteries of snake-charming, and made ever afterwards impervious\nto the bite of venomous Serpents:--\n\n\"At K\u00f3m Omboo, we met with a Rif\u00e1ee darweesh with his basket of tame\nsnakes. After a little talk, he proposed to initiate me: and so we sat\ndown and held hands like people marrying. Omar [her attendant] sat\nbehind me, and repeated the words as my 'wakeel.' Then the Rif\u00e1ee\ntwisted a cobra round our joined hands, and requested me to spit on\nit; he did the same, and I was pronounced safe and enveloped in\nsnakes. My sailors groaned, and Omar shuddered as the snakes put out\ntheir tongues; the darweesh and I smiled at each other like Roman\naugurs.\"\n\nShe believed that the snakes were toothless; and perhaps on this\noccasion they may have been so. Extracting the teeth of the Serpent is\nan easy business in experienced hands, and is conducted in two ways.\nThose snake-charmers who are confident of their own powers merely\ngrasp the reptile by the neck, force open its jaws with a piece of\nstick, and break off the fangs, which are but loosely attached to the\njaw. Those who are not so sure of themselves irritate the snake, and\noffer it a piece of cloth, generally the corner of their mantle, to\nbite. The snake darts at it, and, as it seizes the garment, the man\ngives the cloth a sudden jerk, and so tears away the fangs.\n\nStill, although some of the performers employ mutilated snakes, there\nis no doubt that others do not trouble themselves to remove the fangs\nof the Serpents, but handle with impunity the cobra or the cerastes\nwith all its venomous apparatus in good order.\n\nWe now come to the second branch of the subject, namely, the influence\nof sound upon the cobra and other Serpents. The charmers are always\nprovided with musical instruments, of which a sort of flute with a\nloud shrill sound is the one which is mostly used in the performances.\nHaving ascertained, from slight marks which their practised eyes\neasily discover, that a Serpent is hidden in some crevice, the charmer\nplays upon his flute, and in a short time the snake is sure to make\nits appearance.\n\nAs soon as it is fairly out, the man seizes it by the end of the tail,\nand holds it up in the air at arm's length. In this position it is\nhelpless, having no leverage, and merely wriggles about in fruitless\nstruggles to escape. Having allowed it to exhaust its strength by its\nefforts, the man lowers it into a basket, where it is only too glad to\nfind a refuge, and closes the lid. After a while, he raises the lid\nand begins to play the flute.\n\nThe Serpent tries to glide out of the basket, but, as soon as it does\nso, the lid is shut down again, and in a very short time the reptile\nfinds that escape is impossible, and, as long as it hears the sound of\nthe flute, only raises its head in the air, supporting itself on the\nlower portion of its tail, and continues to wave its head from side to\nside as long as it hears the sound of the music.\n\nThe rapidity with which a cobra learns this lesson is extraordinary,\nthe charmers being as willing to show their mastery over newly-caught\nSerpents as over those which have been long in their possession. Some\npersons have thought that all the snakes caught by the professional\ncharmers are tame reptiles, which have been previously placed in the\nhole by the men, and which have been deprived of their fangs. Careful\ninvestigations, however, have proved that the snake is really\nattracted by the shrill notes of the flute, and that the charmers\nhandle with unconcern the snakes which are in full possession of their\nfangs and poison-glands.\n\nThe allusion to the \"deaf adder, which stoppeth her ears.\" needs a\nlittle explanation. Some species of Serpent are more susceptible to\nsound than others, the cobra being the most sensitive of all the\ntribe. Any of these which are comparatively insensible to the charmers\nefforts may be considered as \"deaf adders.\" But there has been from\ntime immemorial a belief in the East that some individual Serpents are\nvery obstinate and self-willed, refusing to hear the shrill sound of\nthe flute, or the magic song of the charmer, and pressing one ear into\nthe dust, while they stop the other with the tail.\n\nLouis of Grenada, one of whose quaint sermons has already been quoted,\nalludes in another discourse to this curious belief, in which it is\nevident that he fully concurred.\n\n\"_Dominica XI. post Pent. Concio_ 1:\n\n\"'Furor illis secundum similitudinem serpentis sicut aspidis et\nobturantis aures suas; qu\u00e6 non exaudit vocem incantantium, et venefici\nincantantis sapienter.'\n\n\"Vulgo enim ferunt aspidem cum incantatur ne lethali veneno homines\ninficiat, alteram aurem terr\u00e6 affigere, alteram vero cauda in eam\nimmissa obstruere ut ita demum veneni vis intus latentis ill\u00e6sa\nmaneat.\n\n\"Ad hoc igitur modum cum sapiens incantatur, hoc est, divini verbi\nconcionator obstinatos homines ad sanitatem perducere et lethale\nvenenum peccati, quod in eorum mentibus residet delere contendit; illi\ncontra (d\u00e6mone id operante) sic aures suas huic divin\u00e6 incantationi\nclaudunt ut nihil prorsus eorum qu\u00e6 dicuntur advertant.\"\n\n\"_Eleventh Sunday after Pentecost, Sermon_ 1:\n\n\"'Their fury is after the likeness of the serpent, as the asp which\neven stoppeth her ears--which heedeth not the voice of the charmers;\neven of the wizard which charmeth wisely.'\n\n\"For they say commonly, the asp while she is charmed, so that she\npoisoneth not men with her deadly venom, layeth one of her ears to the\nground and stoppeth the other by thereinto putting her tail, that so\nthe strength of the poison which lurketh within may abide unhurt.\n\n\"After this manner, therefore, when the wise charmer--that is, the\npreacher of the Word of God--striveth to lead obstinate men to health,\nand to destroy the deadly poison of sin which dwelleth in their minds,\nthey, on the other hand (the devil bringing this to pass), do so shut\ntheir ears to this divine charming that they heed nothing at all of\nthese things which are said.\"\n\nIn order to show how widely this idea of the snake stopping its ears\nis spread, I insert the following extract from a commentary on the\nPsalms by Richard Rolle (Hermit) of Hampole. It is taken from the MS.\nin Eton College Library, No. 10, date 1450. R. Rolle died just a\nhundred years before his commentary was translated into the Northern\ndialect.\n\n\"'Furor illis se[~c]d[~m] similitudin[~e] [~s]pentis: sicut aspidus\nsurde et obturantis aures suas.' \u00b6 Wodnes til \u00dease after \u00dee lykenying\nof nedder: als of snake doumbe and stoppand hir erres. \u00b6 Rightly\ncalles he \u00dea[~i] wode for \u00deai haue na witt to se whider \u00deai ga for \u00deai\nlouke \u00deaire eghen and rennes til \u00dee fire \u00deaire wodnes es domested \u00deat\nwill not be [~t]ned als of \u00dee snake \u00deat festes \u00dee tane ere till \u00dee\nerther and \u00dee to\u00deer stopis with hi[~r] tayle swa \u00deai do \u00deat here noght\ngodes worde \u00deai stoppe \u00deai[~r] erres with lufe of erthely thyng \u00deat\n\u00deai delite \u00dea[~i] one and with \u00deaire tayle \u00deat es with aide synes \u00deat \u00deai\nwill noght amende.\"\n\nIt may be as well to remark, before passing to another of the\nSerpents, that snakes have no external ears, and that therefore the\nnotion of the serpent stopping its ears is zoologically a simple\nabsurdity.\n\n\nTHE CERASTES, OR SHEPHIPHON OF SCRIPTURE.\n\nThe word _shephiphon_, which evidently signifies some species of\nsnake, only occurs once in the Scriptures, but fortunately that single\npassage contains an allusion to the habits of the serpent which makes\nidentification nearly certain. The passage in question occurs in Gen.\nxlix. 17, and forms part of the prophecy of Jacob respecting his\nchildren: \"Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path,\nthat biteth the horses heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.\"\n\nPutting aside the deeper meaning of this prophecy, there is here an\nevident allusion to the habits of the CERASTES, or HORNED VIPER, a\nspecies of venomous serpent, which is plentiful in Northern Africa,\nand is found also in Palestine and Syria. It is a very conspicuous\nreptile, and is easily recognised by the two horn-like projections\nover the eyes. The name Cerastes, or horned, has been given to it on\naccount of these projections.\n\nThis snake has a custom of lying half buried in the sand, awaiting the\napproach of some animal on which it can feed. Its usual diet consists\nof the jerboas and other small mammalia, and as they are exceedingly\nactive, while the Cerastes is slow and sluggish, its only chance of\nobtaining food is to lie in wait. It will always take advantage of any\nsmall depression, such as the print of a camel's foot, and, as it\nfinds many of these depressions in the line of the caravans, it is\nliterally \"a serpent by the way, an adder in the path.\"\n\nAccording to the accounts of travellers, the Cerastes is much more\nirritable than the cobra, and is very apt to strike at any object\nwhich may disturb it. Therefore, whenever a horseman passes along the\nusual route, his steed is very likely to disturb a Cerastes lying in\nthe path, and to be liable to the attack of the irritated reptile.\nHorses are instinctively aware of the presence of the snake, and\nmostly perceive it in time to avoid its stroke. Its small dimensions,\nthe snake rarely exceeding two feet in length, enable it to conceal\nitself in a very small hollow, and its brownish-white colour,\ndiversified with darker spots, causes it to harmonize so thoroughly\nwith the loose sand in which it lies buried, that, even when it is\npointed out, an unpractised eye does not readily perceive it.\n\nEven the cobra is scarcely so dreaded as this little snake, whose bite\nis so deadly, and whose habits are such as to cause travellers\nconsiderable risk of being bitten.\n\n\n\n\nTHE VIPER, OR EPHEH.\n\n Passages in which the word _Epheh_ occurs--El-effah--The Sand\n Viper, or Toxicoa--Its appearance and habits--The\n Acshub--Adder's poison--The Spuugh-Slange--The Cockatrice, or\n Tsepha--The Yellow Viper--Ancient ideas concerning the\n Cockatrice--Power of its venom.\n\n\nWe now come to the species of snake which cannot be identified with\nany certainty, and will first take the word _epheh_, which is\ncuriously like to the Greek _ophis_. From the context of the three\npassages in which it occurs, it is evidently a specific, and not a\ncollective name, but we are left in much doubt as to the precise\nspecies which is intended by it. The first of those passages occurs in\nJob xx. 16: \"The viper's (_epheh_) tongue shall slay him.\" The second\nis found in Isa. xxx. 6: \"The burden of the beasts of the south: into\nthe land of trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and old\nlion, the viper (_epheh_) and fiery flying serpent.\" The last of these\npassages occurs in ch. lix. 5 of the same book: \"That which is crushed\nbreaketh out into a viper\" (_epheh_).\n\nThe reader will see that in neither of those passages have we the\nleast intimation as to the particular species which is signified by\nthe word _epheh_, and the only collateral evidence which we have on\nthe subject fails exactly in the most important point. We are told by\nShaw that in Northern Africa there is a small snake, the most\npoisonous of its tribe, which is called by the name of _El-effah_, a\nword which is absolutely identical with the Epheh of the Old\nTestament. But, as he does not identify the _effah_, except by saying\nthat it rarely exceeds a foot in length, we gain little by its\ndiscovery.\n\nMr. Tristram believes that he has identified the Epheh of the Old\nTestament with the Sand-Viper, or Toxicoa (_Echis arenicola_). This\nreptile, though very small, and scarcely exceeding a foot in length,\nis a dangerous one, though its bite is not so deadly as that of the\ncobra or cerastes. It is variable in colour, but has angular white\nstreaks on its body, and a row of whitish spots along the back. The\ntop of the head is dark, and variegated with arrow-shaped white marks.\n\n [Illustration: THE TOXICOA. (Supposed to be the viper of Scripture.)\n\n \"_The viper's tongue shall slay him._\"--JOB xx. 16.]\n\nThe Toxicoa is very plentiful in Northern Africa, Palestine, Syria,\nand the neighbouring countries, and, as it is exceedingly active, is\nheld in some dread by the natives. The Toxicoa is closely allied to\nthe dreaded Horatta-pam snake of India (_Echis carinata_).\n\nThe old Hebraists can make nothing of the word, but it is not unlikely\nthat a further and fuller investigation of the ophiology of Northern\nAfrica may succeed where mere scholarship, unallied with zoological\nknowledge, has failed.\n\n\nThe next word is _acshub_ (pronounced [)a]k-shoob). It only occurs in\none passage, namely Ps. cxl. 3: \"They have sharpened their tongues\nlike a serpent (_nachash_); adder's (_acshub_) poison is under their\nlips.\" The precise species represented by this word is unknown.\nBuxtorf, however, explains the word as the Spitter, \"illud genus quod\nvenenum procul exspuit.\" Now, if we accept this derivation, we must\ntake the word _acshub_ as a synonym for _pethen_. We have already\nidentified the Pethen with the Naja haje, a snake which has the power\nof expelling the poison to some distance, when it is out of reach of\nits enemy. Whether the snake really intends to eject the poison, or\nwhether it is merely flung from the hollow fangs by the force of the\nsuddenly-checked stroke, is uncertain. That the Haje cobra can expel\nits poison is an acknowledged fact, and the Dutch colonists of the\nCape have been so familiarly acquainted with this habit, that they\nhave called this reptile by the name of Spuugh-Slange, or Spitting\nSnake, a name which, if we accept Buxtorf's etymology, is precisely\nequivalent to the word _acshub_.\n\n\nAnother name of a poisonous snake occurs several times in the Old\nTestament. The word is _tsepha_, or _tsiph\u00f4ni_, and it is sometimes\ntranslated as Adder, and sometimes as Cockatrice. The word is rendered\nas Adder in Prov. xxiii. 32, where it is said that wine \"biteth like a\nserpent, and stingeth like an adder.\" Even in this case, however, the\nword is rendered as Cockatrice in the marginal translation.\n\nIt is found three times in the Book of Isaiah. Ch. xi. 8: \"The weaned\nchild shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.\" Also, ch. xiv. 29:\n\"Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote\nthee is broken: for out of the serpent's (_nachash_) nest shall come\nforth a cockatrice (_tsepha_), and his fruit shall be a fiery flying\nserpent.\" The same word occurs again in ch. lix. 5: \"They hatch\ncockatrice' eggs.\" In the prophet Jeremiah we again find the word:\n\"For, behold, I will send serpents, cockatrices among you, which will\nnot be charmed, and they shall bite you, saith the Lord.\"\n\nThis last passage gives us a little, but not much, assistance in\nidentifying the Tsepha. We learn by it that the Tsepha was one of the\nserpents that were not subject to charmers, and so we are able to say\nthat it was neither the cobra, which we have identified with the\nPethen of Scripture, nor the Cerastes or Horned Snake, which has been\nshown to be the Shephiphon. Our evidence is therefore only of a\nnegative character, and the only positive evidence is that which may\nbe inferred from the passage in Isa. xiv. 29, where the Tsepha is\nevidently thought to be more venomous than the ordinary serpent or\nNachash.\n\nMr. Tristram suggests that the Tsepha of Scripture may possibly be the\nYellow Viper (_Daboia xanthica_), which is one of the largest and most\nvenomous of the poisonous serpents which are found in Palestine, and\nwhich is the more dangerous on account of its nocturnal habits. This\nsnake is one of the Katukas, and is closely allied to the dreaded\nTic-polonga of Ceylon, a serpent which is so deadly, and so given to\ninfesting houses, that one of the judges was actually driven out of\nhis official residence by it.\n\nAs to the old ideas respecting the origin of the Cockatrice, a very\nfew words will suffice for them. This serpent was thought to be\nproduced from an egg laid by a cock and hatched by a viper. \"For they\nsay,\" writes Topsel, \"that when a cock groweth old, he layeth a\ncertain egge without any shell, in stead whereof it is covered with a\nvery thick skin, which is able to withstand the greatest force of an\neasie blow or fall. They say moreover that this Egge is laid only in\nthe summer time, about the beginning of Dog days, being not so long as\na Hen's Egge, but round and orbicular. Sometimes of a dirty, sometimes\nof a boxy, and sometimes of yellowish muddy colour, which Egge,\nafterwards sat upon by a Snake or a Toad, bringeth forth the\nCockatrice, being half a foot in length, the hinder part like a Snake,\nthe former part like a Cock, because of a treble combe on his\nforehead.\n\n\"But the vulgar opinion of _Europe_ is, that the Egge is nourished by\na Toad, and not by a Snake; howbeit in better experience it found that\nthe Cock doth sit on that Egge himself: whereof _Serianus Semnius_ in\nhis twelfth book of the Hidden Animals of Nature hath this discourse,\nin the fourth chapter thereof. 'There happened,' saith he, 'within our\nmemory, in the city of Piriz\u00e6a, that there were two old Cocks which\nhad laid Egges, and the common people (because of opinion that those\nEgges would engender Cockatrices) laboured by all meanes possible to\nkeep the same Cocks from sitting on those Egges, but they could not\nwith clubs and staves drive them from the Egges, until they were\nforced to break the Egges in sunder, and strangle the Cocks.\"\n\nIn this curious history it is easy to see the origin of the notion\nrespecting the birth of the Cockatrice. It is well known that hens,\nafter they have reached an advanced age, assume much of the plumage\nand voice of the male bird. Still, that one of them should\noccasionally lay an egg is no great matter of wonder, and, as the egg\nwould be naturally deposited in a retired and sheltered spot, such as\nwould be the favoured haunts of the warmth-loving snake, the ignorant\npublic might easily put together a legend which, absurd in itself, is\nyet founded on facts. The small shell-less egg, so often laid by\npoultry, is familiar to every one who has kept fowls.\n\nAround this reptile a wonderful variety of legends have been\naccumulated. The Cockatrice was said to kill by its very look,\n\"because the beams of the Cockatrice's eyes do corrupt the visible\nspirit of a man, which visible spirit corrupted all the other spirits\ncoming from the brain and life of the heart, are thereby corrupted,\nand so the man dyeth.\"\n\nThe subtle poison of the Cockatrice infected everything near it, so\nthat a man who killed a Cockatrice with a spear fell dead himself, by\nreason of the poison darting up the shaft of the spear and passing\ninto his hand. Any living thing near which the Cockatrice passed was\ninstantly slain by the fiery heat of its venom, which was exhaled not\nonly from its mouth, but its sides. For the old writers, whose\nstatements are here summarized, contrived to jumble together a number\nof miscellaneous facts in natural history, and so to produce a most\nextraordinary series of legends. We have already seen the real origin\nof the legend respecting the egg from which the Cockatrice was\nsupposed to spring, and we may here see that some one of these old\nwriters has in his mind some uncertain floating idea of the\nrespiratory orifices of the lamprey, and has engrafted them on the\nCockatrice.\n\n\"To conclude,\" writes Topsel, \"this poyson infecteth the air, and the\nair so infected killeth all living things, and likewise all green\nthings, fruits, and plants of the earth: it burneth up the grasse\nwhereupon it goeth or creepeth, and the fowls of the air fall down\ndead when they come near his den or lodging. Sometimes he biteth a Man\nor a Beast, and by that wound the blood turneth into choler, and so\nthe whole body becometh yellow as gold, presently killing all who\ntouch it or come near it.\"\n\nI should not have given even this limited space to such puerile\nlegends, but for the fact that such stories as these were fully\nbelieved in the days when the Authorized Version of the Bible was\ntranslated. The ludicrous tales which have been occasionally mentioned\nformed the staple of zoological knowledge, and an untravelled\nEnglishman had no possible means of learning the history of foreign\nanimals, except from such books which have been quoted, and which were\nin those days the standard works on Natural History. The translators\nof the Bible believed most heartily in the mysterious and baleful\nreptile, and, as they saw that the Tsepha of Scripture was an\nexceptionally venomous serpent, they naturally rendered it by the word\nCockatrice.\n\n\n\n\nTHE FROG.\n\n The Frog only mentioned in the Old Testament as connected with\n the plagues of Egypt--The severity of this plague explained--The\n Frog detestable to the Egyptians--The Edible Frog and its\n numbers--Description of the species.\n\n\nPlentiful as is the Frog throughout Egypt, Palestine, and Syria, it is\nvery remarkable that in the whole of the canonical books of the Old\nTestament the word is only mentioned thrice, and each case in\nconnexion with the same event.\n\nIn Exod. viii. we find that the second of the plagues which visited\nEgypt came out of the Nile, the sacred river, in the form of\ninnumerable Frogs. The reader will probably remark, on perusing the\nconsecutive account of these plagues, that the two first plagues were\nconnected with that river, and that they were foreshadowed by the\ntransformation of Aaron's rod.\n\nWhen Moses and Aaron appeared before Pharaoh to ask him to let the\npeople go, Pharaoh demanded a miracle from them, as had been foretold.\nFollowing the divine command, Aaron threw down his rod, which was\ntransformed into a crocodile--the most sacred inhabitant of the sacred\nriver--a river which was to the Egyptians what the Ganges is to the\nHindoos.\n\nNext, as was most appropriate, came a transformation wrought on the\nriver by means of the same rod which had been transformed into a\ncrocodile, the whole of the fresh-water throughout the land being\nturned into blood, and the fish dying and polluting the venerated\nriver with their putrefying bodies. In Egypt, a partially rainless\ncountry, such a calamity as this was doubly terrible, as it at the\nsame time desecrated the object of their worship, and menaced them\nwith perishing by thirst.\n\n [Illustration: THE FROG (_Rana esculenta_).\n\n \"_And the river shall bring forth frogs abundantly._\"--EXOD. viii. 3.]\n\nThe next plague had also its origin in the river, but extended far\nbeyond the limits of its banks. The frogs, being unable to return to\nthe contaminated stream wherein they had lived, spread themselves in\nall directions, so as to fulfil the words of the prediction: \"If thou\nrefuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with\nfrogs:\n\n\"And the river shall bring forth frogs abundantly, which shall go up\nand come into thine house, and into thy bed-chamber, and upon thy\nbed, and into the house of thy servants, and upon thy people, and into\nthine ovens, and into thy kneading-troughs\" (or dough).\n\nSupposing that such a plague was to come upon us at the present day,\nwe should consider it to be a terrible annoyance, yet scarcely worthy\nof the name of plague, and certainly not to be classed with the\nturning of a river into blood, with the hail and lightning that\ndestroyed the crops and cattle, and with the simultaneous death of the\nfirst-born. But the Egyptians suffered most keenly from the\ninfliction. They were a singularly fastidious people, and abhorred the\ncontact of anything that they held to be unclean. We may well realize,\ntherefore, the effect of a visitation of Frogs, which rendered their\nhouses unclean by entering them, and themselves unclean by leaping\nupon them; which deprived them of rest by getting on their beds, and\nof food by crawling into their ovens and upon the dough in the\nkneading-troughs.\n\nAnd, as if to make the visitation still worse, when the plague was\nremoved, the Frogs died in the places into which they had intruded, so\nthat the Egyptians were obliged to clear their houses of the dead\ncarcases, and to pile them up in heaps, to be dried by the sun or\neaten by birds and other scavengers of the East.\n\nAs to the species of Frog which thus invaded the houses of the\nEgyptians, there is no doubt whatever. It can be but the GREEN, or\nEDIBLE FROG (_Rana esculenta_), which is so well known for the\ndelicacy of its flesh. This is believed to be the only aquatic Frog of\nEgypt, and therefore must be the species which came out of the river\ninto the houses.\n\nBoth in Egypt and Palestine it exists in very great numbers, swarming\nin every marshy place, and inhabiting the pools in such numbers that\nthe water can scarcely be seen for the Frogs. Thus the multitudes of\nthe Frogs which invaded the Egyptians was no matter of wonder, the\nonly miraculous element being that the reptiles were simultaneously\ndirected to the houses, and their simultaneous death when the plague\nwas taken away.\n\nIt has, however, been suggested that, at the time of year at which the\nevent occurred, the young Frogs were in the tadpole stage of\nexistence, and therefore would not be able to pass over land. But,\neven granting that to be the case, it does not follow that the adult\nFrogs were not numerous enough to produce the visitation, and it\nseems likely that those who were not yet developed were left to\nreproduce the race after the full-grown Frogs had perished.\n\nThe Green Frog is larger than our common English species, and is\nprettily coloured, the back being green, spotted with black, and\nhaving three black stripes upon it. The under parts are yellowish. At\nnight it keeps up a continued and very loud croaking, so that a pond\nin which a number of these Frogs are kept is quite destructive of\nsleep to any one who is not used to the noise.\n\nFrogs are also mentioned in Rev. xvi. 13: \"And I saw three unclean\nspirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the\nmouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.\" With\nthe exception of this passage, which is a purely symbolical one, there\nis no mention of Frogs in the New Testament. It is rather remarkable\nthat the Toad, which might be thought to afford an excellent symbol\nfor various forms of evil, is entirely ignored, both in the Old and\nNew Testaments. Probably the Frogs and Toads were all classed together\nunder the same title.\n\n\n\n\nFISHES.\n\n\n\n\nFISHES.\n\n Impossibility of distinguishing the different species of\n Fishes--The fishermen Apostles--Fish used for food--The miracle\n of the loaves and Fishes--The Fish broiled on the coals--Clean\n and unclean Fishes--The scientific writings of Solomon--The\n Sheat-fish, or Silurus--The Eel and the Mur\u00e6na--The Long-headed\n Barbel--Fish-ponds and preserves--The Fish-ponds of Heshbon--The\n Sucking-fish--The Lump-sucker--The Tunny--The Coryphene.\n\n\nWe now come to the FISHES, a class of animals which are repeatedly\nmentioned both in the Old and New Testaments, but only in general\nterms, no one species being described so as to give the slightest\nindication of its identity.\n\nThis is the more remarkable because, although the Jews were, like all\nOrientals, utterly unobservant of those characteristics by which the\nvarious species are distinguished from each other, we might expect\nthat St. Peter and other of the fisher Apostles would have given the\nnames of some of the Fish which they were in the habit of catching,\nand by the sale of which they gained their living.\n\nIt is true that the Jews, as a nation, would not distinguish between\nthe various species of Fishes, except, perhaps, by comparative size.\nBut professional fishermen would be sure to distinguish one species\nfrom another, if only for the fact that they would sell the\nbest-flavoured Fish at the highest price.\n\nWe might have expected, for example, that the Apostles and disciples\nwho were present when the miraculous draught of Fishes took place\nwould have mentioned the technical names by which they were accustomed\nto distinguish the different degrees of the saleable and unsaleable\nkinds.\n\nOr we might have expected that on the occasion when St. Peter cast his\nline and hook into the sea, and drew out a Fish holding the\ntribute-money in his mouth, we might have learned the particular\nspecies of Fish which was thus captured. We ourselves would assuredly\nhave done so. It would not have been thought sufficient merely to say\nthat a Fish was caught with money in its mouth, but it would have\nbeen considered necessary to mention the particular fish as well as\nthe particular coin.\n\nBut it must be remembered that the whole tone of thought differs in\nOrientals and Europeans, and that the exactness required by the one\nhas no place in the mind of the other. The whole of the Scriptural\nnarratives are essentially Oriental in their character, bringing out\nthe salient points in strong relief, but entirely regardless of minute\ndetail.\n\n\nWe find from many passages both in the Old and New Testaments that\nFish were largely used as food by the Israelites, both when captives\nin Egypt and after their arrival in the Promised Land. Take, for\nexample, Numb. xi. 4, 5: \"And the children of Israel also wept again,\nand said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?\n\n\"We remember the fish which we did eat in Egypt freely.\" Then, in the\nOld Testament, although we do not find many such categorical\nstatements, there are many passages which allude to professional\nfishermen, showing that there was a demand for the Fish which they\ncaught, sufficient to yield them a maintenance.\n\nIn the New Testament, however, there are several passages in which the\nFishes are distinctly mentioned as articles of food. Take, for\nexample, the well-known miracle of multiplying the loaves and the\nFishes, and the scarcely less familiar passage in John xxi. 9: \"As\nsoon then as they were come to land, they saw a fire of coals there,\nand fish laid thereon, and bread.\n\n\"Jesus saith unto them, Bring of the fish which ye have now caught.\n\n\"Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great fishes,\nan hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet\nwas not the net broken.\n\n\"Jesus saith unto them, Come and dine. And none of the disciples durst\nask Him, Who art Thou? knowing that it was the Lord.\n\n\"Jesus then cometh, and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish\nlikewise.\"\n\nWe find in all these examples that bread and Fish were eaten together.\nIndeed, Fish was eaten with bread just as we eat cheese or butter; and\nSt. John, in his account of the multiplication of the loaves and\nFishes, does not use the word \"fish,\" but another word which rather\nsignifies sauce, and was generally employed to designate the little\nFish that were salted down and dried in the sunbeams for future use.\n\nAs to the various species which were used for different purposes, we\nknow really nothing, the Jews merely dividing their Fish into clean\nand unclean.\n\nStill, we find that Solomon treated of Fishes as well as of other\nportions of the creation. \"And he spake of trees, from the cedar tree\nthat is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the\nwall: he spake also of beasts, and of fowl, and of creeping things,\nand of fishes.\" (1 Kings iv. 33.)\n\nNow it is evidently impossible that Solomon could have treated of\nFishes without distinguishing between their various species.\nComparatively young as he was, he had received such a measure of\ndivine inspiration, that \"there came of all people to know the wisdom\nof Solomon, from all kings of the earth, which had heard of his\nwisdom.\"\n\nYet, although some of his poetical and instructive writings have\nsurvived to our time, the whole of his works on natural history have\nso completely perished, that they have not even introduced into the\nlanguage the names of the various creatures of which he wrote. So, in\nspite of all his labours, there is not a single word in the Hebrew\nlanguage, as now known, by which one species of Fish can be\ndistinguished from another, as to the distinction between the clean\nand unclean Fishes.\n\nAccording to Levit. xi. the qualification for food lay simply in the\npossession of fins and scales. \"These shall ye eat of all that are in\nthe waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the\nseas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.\n\n\"And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers,\nof all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in\nthe waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:\n\n\"They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their\nflesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination\" (ver. 9-11).\nThere is a similar prohibition in Deut. xiv. 9.\n\nSome of the species to which this prohibition would extend are evident\nenough. There are, for example, the Sheat-fishes, which have the body\nnaked, and which are therefore taken out of the list of permitted\nFishes. The Sheat-fishes inhabit rivers in many parts of the world,\nand often grow to a very considerable size. They may be at once\nrecognised by their peculiar shape, and by the long, fleshy tentacles\nthat hang from the mouth. The object of these tentacles is rather\ndubious, but as the fish have been seen to direct them at will to\nvarious objects, it is likely that they may answer as organs of touch.\n\n [Illustration: 1. MUR\u00c6NA (Mur\u00e6na helena).\n\n 2. LONG-HEADED BARBEL (Barbus longiceps).\n\n 3. SHEAT-FISH (Silurus macracanthus).\n\n \"_All that have not fins and scales ... shall be an abomination unto\n you._\"--LEVIT. xi. 10.]\n\nAs might be conjectured from its general appearance, it is one of the\nFishes that love muddy banks, in which it is fond of burrowing so\ndeeply that, although the river may swarm with Sheat-fishes, a\npractised eye is required to see them.\n\nAs far as the Sheat-fishes are concerned, there is little need for the\nprohibition, inasmuch as the flesh is not at all agreeable in flavour,\nand is difficult of digestion, being very fat and gelatinous. The\nswimming-bladder of the Sheat-fish is used in some countries for\nmaking a kind of isinglass, similar in character to that of the\nsturgeon, but of coarser quality.\n\nThe lowermost figure in the illustration on page 566 represents a\nspecies which is exceedingly plentiful in the Sea of Galilee.\n\nOn account of the mode in which their body is covered, the whole of\nthe sharks and rays are excluded from the list of permitted Fish, as,\nalthough they have fins, they have no scales, their place being taken\nby shields varying greatly in size. The same rule excludes the whole\nof the lamprey tribe, although the excellence of their flesh is well\nknown.\n\nMoreover, the Jews almost universally declare that the Mur\u00e6na and Eel\ntribe are also unclean, because, although it has been proved that\nthese Fishes really possess scales as well as fins, and are therefore\nlegally permissible, the scales are hidden under a slimy covering, and\nare so minute as to be practically absent.\n\nThe uppermost figure in the illustration represents the celebrated\nMur\u00e6na, one of the fishes of the Mediterranean, in which sea it is\ntolerably plentiful. In the days of the old Roman empire, the Mur\u00e6na\nwas very highly valued for the table. The wealthier citizens built\nponds in which the Mur\u00e6n\u00e6 were kept alive until they were wanted. This\nFish sometimes reaches four feet in length.\n\nThe rest of the Fishes which are shown in the three illustrations\nbelong to the class of clean Fish, and were permitted as food. The\nfigure of the Fish between the Mur\u00e6na and Sheat-fish is the\nLong-headed Barbel, so called from its curious form.\n\nThe Barbels are closely allied to the carps, and are easily known by\nthe barbs or beards which hang from their lips. Like the sheat-fishes,\nthe Barbels are fond of grubbing in the mud, for the purpose of\ngetting at the worms, grubs, and larv\u00e6 of aquatic insects that are\nalways to be found in such places. The Barbels are rather long in\nproportion to their depth, a peculiarity which, owing to the length of\nthe head, is rather exaggerated in this species.\n\nThe Long-headed Barbel is extremely common in Palestine, and may be\ntaken with the very simplest kind of net. Indeed, in some places, the\nfish are so numerous that a common sack answers nearly as well as a\nnet.\n\nIt has been mentioned that the ancient Romans were in the habit of\nforming ponds in which the Mur\u00e6n\u00e6 were kept, and it is evident, from\nseveral passages of Scripture, that the Jews were accustomed to\npreserve fish in a similar manner, though they would not restrict\ntheir tanks or ponds to one species.\n\nAllusion is made to this custom in the Song of Solomon: \"Thy neck is\nas a tower of ivory; thine eyes like the fish-pools in Heshbon, by the\ngate of Bath-rabbim.\" The Hebrew Bible renders the passage in a\nslightly different manner, not specifying the particular kind of pool.\n\"Thine eyes are as the pools in Heshbon by a gate of great concourse.\"\n\nBuxtorf, however, in his Hebrew Lexicon, translates the word as\n\"piscina,\" _i.e._ fish-pond. Now among the ruins of Heshbon may still\nbe seen the remains of a large tank, which in all probability was one\nof the \"fish-pools\" which are mentioned by the sacred writer.\n\nIf we accept the rendering of the Authorized Version, it is shown that\ntanks or ponds were employed for this purpose, by a passage which\noccurs in the prophecy of Isaiah: \"The fishers also shall mourn, and\nall they that cast angle into the brooks shall lament, and they that\nspread nets upon the waters shall languish.\n\n\"Moreover they that work in fine flax, and they that weave networks,\nshall be confounded.\n\n\"And they shall be broken in the purposes thereof, all that make\nsluices and ponds for fish\" (xix. 8-10).\n\nThis passage, however, is rendered rather variously. The marginal\ntranslation of verse 10 substitutes the word \"foundations\" for\n\"purposes,\" and the words \"living things\" for \"fish.\" The Jewish Bible\ntakes an entirely different view of the passage, and renders it as\nfollows: \"The fishers also shall groan, and all that cast angle into\nthe river shall mourn, and they that spread nets upon the waters shall\nbe languid.\n\n\"Moreover, they that work in combed flax and they that weave networks\nshall be confounded.\n\n\"And the props thereof shall be crushed; all working for wages are\nvoid of soul.\"\n\nHowever, the mark of doubt is affixed to this last phrase, and it\ncannot be denied that the rendering of the Authorized Version is at\nall events more consistent than that of the Jewish Bible. In the\nformer, we first find the fishers taking their prey with the hook and\nline, then with different kinds of nets, and lastly, placing the fish\nthus captured in sluices and ponds until they are wanted for\nconsumption.\n\n [Illustration: FISHES OF THE MEDITERRANEAN.\n\n 1. SUCKING-FISH (Echeneis remora).\n\n 2. TUNNY (Thynnus thynnus).\n\n 3. CORYPHENE (Coryph\u00e6na hippuris).\n\n \"_These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters._\"--LEVIT. xi. 9.]\n\nThe accompanying illustration represents Fishes of the Mediterranean\nSea, and it is probable that one of them may be identified, though the\npassage in which it is mentioned is only an inferential one. In the\nprophecy against Pharaoh, king of Egypt, the prophet Ezekiel writes as\nfollows: \"I will put hooks in thy jaws, and I will cause the fish of\nthy rivers to stick unto thy scales, and I will bring thee up out of\nthe midst of thy rivers, and all the fish of thy rivers shall stick\nunto thy scales\" (xxix. 4).\n\nReference is here made to some inhabitant of the waters that has the\npower of adhesion, and two suggestions have been made respecting the\nprecise signification of the passage. Some commentators think that the\n\"Fishes\" here mentioned are the Cuttles, which, although they are not\nFishes at all, but belong to the molluscs, are called Fishes after the\nloose nomenclature of the Hebrew language, just as, even in our\nstricter and more copious language, we speak of the same creature as\nthe Cuttle-fish, and use the word \"shell-fish\" to denote both molluscs\nand crustacea.\n\nOthers believe that the prophet made allusion to the Sucking-fish,\nwhich has the dorsal fins developed into a most curious apparatus of\nadhesion, by means of which it can fasten itself at will to any smooth\nobject, and hold so tightly to it that it can scarcely be torn away\nwithout injury.\n\nThe common Sucking-fish (_Echeneis remora_) is shown in the upper part\nof the illustration.\n\nThere are, however, other fish which have powers of adhesion which,\nalthough not so remarkable as those of the Sucking-fish, are yet very\nstrong. There is, for example, the well-known Lump-sucker, or\nLump-fish, which has the ventral fins modified into a sucker so\npowerful that, when one of these fishes has been put into a pail of\nwater, it has attached itself so firmly to the bottom of the vessel\nthat when lifted by the tail it raised the pail, together with several\ngallons of water.\n\nThe Gobies, again, have their ventral fins united and modified into a\nsingle sucker, by means of which the fish is able to secure itself to\na stone, rock, or indeed any tolerably smooth surface. These fishes\nare popularly known as Bull-routs.\n\nThe centre of the illustration is occupied by another of the\nMediterranean fishes. This is the well-known Tunny (_Thynnus\nthynnus_), which furnishes food to the inhabitants of the coasts of\nthis inland sea, and indeed constitutes one of their principal sources\nof wealth. This fine fish is on an average four or five feet in\nlength, and sometimes attains the length of six or seven feet.\n\nThe flesh of the Tunny is excellent, and the fish is so conspicuous,\nthat the silence of the Scriptures concerning its existence shows the\nutter indifference to specific accuracy that prevailed among the\nvarious writers.\n\nThe other figure represents the Coryphene (_Coryph\u00e6na hippuris_),\npopularly, though very wrongly, called the Dolphin, and celebrated,\nunder that name, for the beautiful colours which fly over the surface\nof the body as it dies.\n\nThe flesh of the Coryphene is excellent, and in the times of classic\nRome the epicures were accustomed to keep these fish alive, and at the\nbeginning of a feast to lay them before the guests, so that they\nmight, in the first place, witness the magnificent colours of the\ndying fish, and, in the second place, might be assured that when it\nwas cooked it was perfectly fresh. Even during life, the Coryphene is\na most lovely fish, and those who have witnessed it playing round a\nship, or dashing off in chase of a shoal of flying-fishes, can\nscarcely find words to express their admiration of its beauty.\n\n\nFISHES.\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n Various modes of capturing Fish--The hook and line--Military use\n of the hook--Putting a hook in the jaws--The fishing\n spear--Different kinds of net--The casting-net--Prevalence of\n this form--Technical words among fishermen--Fishing by\n night--The draught of Fishes--The real force of the\n miracle--Selecting the Fish--The Fish-gate and Fish-market--Fish\n killed by a draught--Fishing in the Dead Sea--Dagon, the\n fish-god of Philistina, Assyria, and Siam--Various Fishes of\n Egypt and Palestine.\n\nAs to the various methods of capturing Fish, we will first take the\nsimplest plan, that of the hook and line, as is mentioned in the\npassage quoted above from Ezekiel. Sundry other references are made to\nangling, both in the Old and New Testaments. See, for example, the\nwell-known passage respecting the leviathan, in Job xli. 1, 2: \"Canst\nthou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which\nthou lettest down?\n\n\"Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a\nthorn?\"\n\nIt is thought that the last clause of this passage refers, not to the\nactual capture of the Fish, but to the mode in which they were kept in\nthe tanks, each being secured by a ring or hook and line, so that it\nmight be taken when wanted.\n\nOn referring to the New Testament, we find that the fisher Apostles\nused both the hook and the net. See Matt. xvii. 27: \"Go thou to the\nsea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up.\" Now\nthis passage explains one or two points.\n\nIn the first place, it is one among others which shows that, although\nthe Apostles gave up all to follow Christ, they did not throw away\ntheir means of livelihood, as some seem to fancy, nor exist ever\nafterwards on the earnings of others. On the contrary, they retained\ntheir fisher equipment, whether boats, nets, or hooks; and here we\nfind St. Peter, after the way of fishermen, carrying about with him\nthe more portable implements of his craft.\n\nNext, the phrase \"casting\" the hook into the sea is exactly expressive\nof the mode in which angling is conducted in the sea and large pieces\nof water, such as the Lake of Galilee. The fisherman does not require\na rod, but takes his line, which has a weight just above the hook,\ncoils it on his left arm in lasso fashion, baits the hook, and then,\nwith a peculiar swing, throws it into the water as far as it will\nreach. The hook is allowed to sink for a short time, and is then drawn\ntowards the shore in a series of jerks, in order to attract the Fish,\nso that, although the fisherman does not employ a rod, he manages his\nline very much as does an angler of our own day when \"spinning\" for\npike or trout.\n\nSometimes the fisherman has a number of lines to manage, and in this\ncase he acts in a slightly different manner. After throwing out the\nloaded hook, as above mentioned, he takes a short stick, notched at\none end, and pointed at the other, thrusts the sharp end into the\nground at the margin of the water, and hitches the line on the notch.\n\nHe then proceeds to do the same with all his lines in succession, and\nwhen he has flung the last hook into the water, he sits down on a heap\nof leaves and grass which he has gathered together, and watches the\nlines to see if either of them is moved in the peculiar jerking manner\nwhich is characteristic of a \"bite.\" After a while, he hauls them in\nsuccessively, removes the Fish that may have been caught, and throws\nthe lines into the water afresh.\n\nThis mode of fishing is mentioned in Habakkuk i. 15: \"They take up all\nof them with the angle.\"\n\nThere are one or two passages which seem to refer to the custom of\nangling, though they really bear on a different subject. One of these\nis to be found in Ezek. xxxviii.: \"And I will turn thee back, and put\nhooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth and all thine army,\nhorses and horsemen.\" There is another passage of a similar character\nin Amos iv. 2: \"The Lord God hath sworn by His holiness, that, lo, the\ndays shall come upon you, that He will take you away with hooks, and\nyour posterity with fish-hooks.\"\n\nThe word which is here translated as \"hook\" may more properly be\nrendered as \"ring,\" and the prophet alludes to the cruel custom then\nprevalent of passing a sharpened hook through the nose or cheek of a\nprisoner taken in war, twisting it into a ring, tying a cord to it,\nand so leading him just as a bull is led by the ring in the nose.\n\nThere are several references in the Scriptures to the hook used for\nthis cruel purpose. See 2 Kings xix. 28: \"Because thy rage against Me\nand thy tumult is come up into Mine ears, therefore I will put My hook\nin thy nose, and My bridle in thy lips, and I will turn thee back by\nthe way by which thou camest.\"\n\nThe reader will perceive how much more forcible is this passage when\nunderstood rightly than when the word \"hook\" is taken as signifying a\nmere fish-hook, the sum of it being that the Assyrians should be made\ncaptives and slaves, and driven back to the country whence they came.\nThe passage in Ezek. xxix. 4 must be taken in the same sense: \"But I\nwill put hooks in thy jaws.\"\n\nThat the spear was used in the old Scriptural times as it is at the\npresent is shown from several passages of Holy Writ. See, for example,\nJob xli. 7: \"Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head\nwith fish-spears? as also in the same chapter, \"The sword of him that\nlayeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.\n\n\"He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood.\n\n\"The arrow cannot make him flee: sling-stones are turned with him into\nstubble.\n\n\"Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear\"\n(ver. 26-29).\n\nFishing with the spear is much used in the smaller tributary streams\nof the Jordan, and the weapon, instead of being many-pointed and\nbarbed in trident fashion, has but one point, and is without barbs.\nWith these spears the people contrive to catch a considerable variety\nof Fish.\n\nWe now come to the practice of catching Fish by the net, a custom to\nwhich the various Scriptural writers frequently refer, sometimes in\ncourse of historical narrative, and sometimes by way of allegory or\nmetaphor. The reader will remember that the net was also used on land\nfor the purpose of catching wild animals, and that many of the\nallusions to the net which occur in the Old Testament refer to the\nland and not to the water.\n\nThe commonest kind of net, which was used in the olden times as it is\nnow, was the casting-net. This kind of net is circular, and is loaded\nall round its edge with weights, and suspended by the middle to a\ncord. When the fisherman throws this net, he gathers it up in folds in\nhis arms, and, with a peculiar swing of the arms, only to be learned\nby long practice, flings it so that it spreads out and falls in its\ncircular form upon the surface of the water. It rapidly sinks to the\nbottom, the loaded circumference causing it to assume a cup-like form,\nenclosing within its meshes all the Fish that happen to be under it as\nit falls. When it has reached the bottom, the fisherman cautiously\nhauls in the rope, so that the loaded edges gradually approach each\nother, and by their own weight cling together and prevent the Fish\nfrom escaping as the net is slowly drawn ashore.\n\nThis kind of net is found, with certain modifications, in nearly all\nparts of the world. The Chinese are perhaps supreme in their\nmanagement of it. They have a net of extraordinary size, and cast it\nby flinging it over their backs, the huge circle spreading itself out\nin the most perfect manner as it falls on the water.\n\nAt the present day, when the fishermen use this net they wade into the\nsea as far as they can, and then cast it. In consequence of this\ncustom, the fishermen are always naked while engaged in their work,\nwearing nothing but a thick cap in order to save themselves from\nsun-stroke. It is probable that on the memorable occasion mentioned by\nSt. John, in chap. xxi., all the fishermen were absolutely, and not\nrelatively naked--_i.e._ that they wore no clothes at all, not even\nthe ordinary tunic.\n\nThat a great variety of nets was used by the ancient Jews is evident\nfrom the fact that there are no less than ten words to signify\ndifferent kinds of net. At the present day we have very great\ndifficulty in deciding upon the exact interpretation of these\ntechnical terms, especially as in very few cases are we assisted\neither by the context or by the etymology of the words. It is the same\nin all trades or pursuits, and we can easily understand how our own\nnames of drag-net, seine, trawl, and keer-drag would perplex any\ncommentator who happened to live some two thousand years after English\nhad ceased to be a living language.\n\nFour or five of the Hebrew words give no clue whatever, being simply\nderived from a root that signifies weaving, and that therefore merely\nindicates the fact that the articles in question are nets. Some of\nthem are derived from a word which signifies lying in wait, and\nanother from a word which signifies catching or seizing.\n\nThe translators who rendered the Hebrew into the familiar form of the\nSeptuagint either were unable to distinguish between the various\nHebrew terms, or did not think that any discrimination was needed,\ninasmuch as they sometimes render the same Hebrew word by several\nGreek equivalents, and sometimes use the same Greek word to express\nseveral Hebrew terms.\n\nWhen we come to the New Testament, we find a certain feeling of\nrelief, because the three words used to signify different kinds of\nnets are easily understood.\n\nThere is, for example, the _amphibl\u00eastron_ ([Greek: amphibl\u00eastrun]),\nwhich is undoubtedly a casting net, as is signified by the etymology\nof the word, which is derived from two Greek words signifying to cast\naround. This word is used by Herodotus in a sort of parable related by\nCyrus to the Ionians and \u00c6olians, who had refused to revolt from\nCroesus when Cyrus asked them to do so; but, when they found he was\nsure to be their master, they sent an embassy to ask to be admitted\namong his subjects on the same terms which they had enjoyed when under\nthe rule of Croesus.\n\nWhen the embassy came before Cyrus, he only answered them with a\nparable: \"A piper, seeing some fishes in the sea, began to pipe,\nexpecting that they would come ashore; but, finding his hopes\ndisappointed, he took a casting-net, and enclosed a great number of\nfishes, and drew them out. When he saw them leaping about, he said to\nthe fishes, 'Cease your dancing, since when I piped you would not come\nout and dance.'\"\n\nThe reader will doubtless have noticed the singular analogy between\nthis parable and the saying of our Lord, \"I have piped to you, and ye\nhave not danced.\"\n\nThis is the net that is mentioned in Matt. iv. 18: \"And Jesus, walking\nby the Sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter and Andrew\nhis brother, casting a net (_amphibl\u00eastron_) into the sea.\"\n\nThe second word, _diktuon_ ([Greek: dikton]), is derived from another\nword signifying to throw; so that if we use the expression\n\"casting-net\" for the word _amphibl\u00eastron_, and \"throwing-net\" for the\nword _diktuon_, we shall be tolerably accurate. Practically both words\nare used for the same net, as we find by proceeding further with the\nsacred narration.\n\nAfter mentioning that the future Apostles were casting a net\n(_amphibl\u00eastron_), St. Matthew proceeds as follows: \"And He said unto\nthem, Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.\n\n\"And they straightway left their nets (_diktua_), and followed Him\"\n(ver. 19, 20). In the following verse, where James and John are\nmentioned as being occupied in mending their nets after the wont of\nall practical fishermen, the word which is translated as \"nets\" is\n_diktua_.\n\nIf we turn to John xxi. we find the same word employed.\n\nAfter the Resurrection, the fisher Apostles were pursuing their craft\nby night, as is still the custom, and had caught nothing--a very\nserious loss to them. Then at daybreak they saw their risen Lord\nstanding on the seashore, and, as was several times the case after the\nResurrection, did not recognise Him. He then told them to cast the net\n(_diktuon_) over the right hand of the boat, and as soon as that was\ndone the net was filled with Fishes.\n\nNow the knowledge of the real meaning of the word diktua gives to this\npassage a signification which it would not otherwise possess.\n\nIn ver. 11, St. John (who was one of the actors in the scene, and who\ntherefore writes with the precision of an eye-witness) states that the\nnumber of large Fishes was a hundred and fifty-three, and yet the net\nwas not broken. Knowing that the casting-net is comparatively small,\nwe now see that a hundred and fifty-three _large_ Fishes would\ncompletely fill a net which could be cast by one man, and that the\nmiraculous element was twofold.\n\nFirstly, the complete filling of the net with large Fishes, whereas\nsix or seven small Fishes are the usual complement of a casting-net;\nand, secondly, the fact that the net which was held merely by a single\nrope in the middle, and which retained its contents simply by the\nweight of the leads round its margin, did not give way, and allow the\nenclosed Fish to escape.\n\nIndeed, the very fact that a casting-net took such a multitude of\nFishes at once opened the eyes of St. John, who exclaimed to his\nfellow Apostles, \"It is the Lord.\" St. Peter, with the impetuous zeal\nof his nature, acknowledged the truth of the exclamation, and, too\nimpatient to wait until the boats could land, girt his fisher's tunic\nupon him, leaped into the sea, and swam ashore.\n\nThe third Greek word which is translated as \"net\" is _sag\u00ean\u00ea_ ([Greek:\nsag\u00ean\u00ea]), a word which still survives in our term \"Seine.\"\n\nThe Sagene, or seine-net, was made in lengths, any number of which\ncould be joined together, so as to enclose a large space of water. The\nupper edge was kept at the surface of the water by floats, and the\nlower edge sunk by weights.\n\nThis net was always taken to sea in vessels, and when \"shot\" the\nvarious lengths were joined together, and the net extended in a line,\nwith a boat at each end. The boats then gradually approached each\nother, so as to bring the net into a semicircle, and finally met,\nenclosing thereby a vast number of Fishes in their meshen walls. The\nwater was then beaten, so as to frighten the Fishes and drive them\ninto the meshes, and the net was then either taken ashore, or lifted\nby degrees on board the boats, and the Fish removed from it.\n\nAs in a net of this kind Fishes of all sorts are enclosed, the\ncontents are carefully examined, and those which are unfit for eating\nare thrown away. Even at the present day much care is taken in the\nselection, but in the ancient times the fishermen were still more\ncautious, every Fish having to be separately examined in order that\nthe presence both of fins and scales might be assured before the\ncaptors could send it to the market.\n\nIt is to this custom that Christ alludes in the well-known parable of\nthe net: \"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net that was\ncast into the sea, and gathered of every kind;\n\n\"Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and\ngathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.\" Compare also\nHabakkuk i. 14-17.\n\n\nThe important part taken by Fish in the earlier scriptural days is\nshown by the fact that in Jerusalem there was not only a fish-market,\nbut that the gate which opened upon that market was called the\nFish-gate. See 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14: \"Now after this he built a wall\nwithout the city of David, on the west side of Gihon, in the valley,\neven to the entering in at the fish-gate.\"\n\nAfterwards, when Nehemiah obtained permission from Artaxerxes to\nrebuild the burnt and broken-down walls of Jerusalem, he restored the\nFish-gate as it had been before: \"But the fish-gate did the sons of\nHassenaah build, who also laid the beams thereof, and set up the doors\nthereof, the locks thereof, and the bars thereof\" (Neh. iii. 3).\n\nAbout ten years afterwards, when the city had been rebuilt and\nrepeopled, the fish-market was again established, the dealers being\nchiefly men of Tyre, who took advantage of the neglect of the law\nwhich had been the result of the captivity among idolaters, and sold\ntheir goods on the Sabbath day: \"There dwelt men of Tyre also therein,\nwhich brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the Sabbath\nunto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem\" (Neh. xiii. 16).\n\nIt is evident that the Fish which these traders brought must have been\ndried and salted, or otherwise they would not have borne the journey\nto Jerusalem from Tyre. Dried Fish were, according to Herodotus,\nlargely used in Egypt, and it is probable that the Jews learned the\nart of drying and salting Fish for future use during their captivity\nin that land.\n\nThere are one or two passages in the Scriptures which relate to Fish,\nthough in a less direct manner than those which have been quoted. One\nof them refers to the times of drought which occasionally visit\nPalestine, and which always bring with them terrible privations, and\nsometimes cause actual famine. See, for example, Isa. 1. 2: \"Behold,\nat My rebuke I dry up the sea, I make the rivers a wilderness: their\nfish stinketh, because there is no water, and dieth for thirst.\" These\nwords exactly express the condition of the country after a long\ndrought. The springs are gradually exhausted from the absence of rain,\nthe large rivers sink lower and lower in their beds, and the little\nstreams and tributaries dry up altogether, leaving their inhabitants\nto perish for want of water.\n\nBy way of contrast to this passage, we will take another, which\nspeaks, not of death, but of life. It occurs in Ezek. xlvii. 10, and\nforms part of the vision in which the future of the Church was\nforetold:\n\n\"And it shall come to pass, that everything that liveth, which moveth,\nwhithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live: and there shall be a\nvery great multitude of fish, because these waters shall come thither:\nfor they shall be healed; and everything shall live whither the river\ncometh.\n\n\"And it shall come to pass, that the fishers shall stand upon it from\nEn-gedi even unto En-eglaim; they shall be a place to spread forth\nnets; their fish shall be according to their kinds, as the fish of the\ngreat sea, exceeding many.\"\n\nNow this is one of the many passages which might be passed over\nlightly, because its general signification is so evident, and yet\nwhich requires to be understood before its full force can be\ncomprehended. Both these places, En-gedi and En-eglaim, are on the\nshores of the Dead Sea, in which no creature can live. Thousands of\nsmall Fishes are daily carried into the Dead Sea from the Jordan, and\nas soon as the fresh water of the river mingles with the poisonous\nwaves of the Dead Sea the Fishes die. Putting aside as foreign to the\npurpose of this work the metaphorical signification of the passage, we\nfind that the prophet foretold a complete regeneration of the waters,\nso that, instead of destroying every creature that entered them, the\nFishes should multiply so that fishermen should ply their trade from\none part of the Dead Sea to another.\n\nAgain, in Hosea iv: 3, where the destruction of Fish is mentioned\namong the plagues that would follow the continual disobedience of the\nIsraelites: \"Because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of\nGod in the land, ....\n\n\"Therefore shall the land mourn, and every one that dwelleth therein\nshall languish, with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of\nheaven: yea, the fishes of the sea also shall be taken away.\"\n\n\nLastly, we come to the religious, or rather superstitious, part played\nby Fish in the ancient times. That the Egyptians employed Fish as\nmaterial symbols of Divine attributes we learn from secular writers,\nsuch as Herodotus and Strabo.\n\nThe Jews, who seem to have had an irrepressible tendency to idolatry,\nand to have adopted the idols of every people with whom they came in\ncontact, resuscitated the Fish-worship of Egypt as soon as they found\nthemselves among the Philistines. We might naturally imagine that as\nthe Israelites were bitterly opposed to their persistent enemy, who\ntrod them under foot and crushed every attempt at rebellion for more\nthan three hundred years, they would repudiate the worship as well as\nthe rule of their conquerors. But, on the contrary, they adopted the\nworship of Dagon, the Fish-god, who was the principal deity of the\nPhilistines, and erected temples in his honour.\n\nTheir tendency to this Fish-worship is specially noticed in the\ncommandment that they were not to worship \"the likeness of anything\nthat creepeth on the ground\" (i.e. serpent-worship), \"the likeness of\nany fish that is in the waters beneath the earth\" (Deut. iv. 18).\n\nWe learn from 1 Sam. v. 4 the form of this idol: \"When they arose\nearly on the morrow morning, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to\nthe ground before the ark of the Lord; and the head of Dagon and both\nthe palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump\nof Dagon was left to him.\"\n\nIf the reader will refer to this passage, he will see that the latter\npart is rendered in the marginal reading as \"the fishy part was left\nto him.\" The Jewish Bible has nearly the same reading, \"only a\nfish-stump had remained of him.\"\n\nIt is evident, therefore, that Dagon had the head, body, and arms of\na man, and that the figure terminated in a Fish's tail. In fact, there\nis little doubt that to the various figures of this deity is owing the\nwide-spread belief in mermen. We find the same image among the\nAssyrians, who not only represented the god as half man and half fish,\nbut who dressed his priest in a garment representing the skin of a\nFish, with the head worn as a helmet, and the rest of the skin flowing\ndown the back.\n\nWe find precisely the same worship at the present day in Siam, where\nDagon has exactly the same form as among the Philistines of old. There\nis now before me a photograph of a great temple at Ayutia, the\nentrance to which is guarded by two huge images of the Fish-god. They\nare about sixty feet in height, and have both legs and feet like man,\nbut in addition the lower part of the body is modified into the tail\nof a Fish, which, in common with the whole of the body, is covered\nwith gilded scales.\n\nIt is conjectured that the Fish was chosen as an emblem of fecundity,\non account of the wonderful fertility of the Fish tribes. That the\nIsraelites were familiarly acquainted with this fact is shown by a\npassage in the benediction of Jacob. In speaking of Joseph, he uses\nthese words: \"The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the\nlads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers\nAbraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude\" (\"as fishes do\nincrease,\" marg. trans.) \"in the midst of the earth\" (Gen. xlviii.\n16).\n\n\nIn order that the reader may see examples of the typical Fish which\nare to be found in Egypt and Palestine, I have added three more\nspecies, which are represented in the following illustration.\n\nThe uppermost figure represents the NILE PERCH (_Lates Niloticus_).\nThis Fish is plentiful in the Nile, and in the mouths of many Asiatic\nrivers. It is brown above, silvery white below, and may be\ndistinguished by the armed gill-covers, and the three strong spines of\nthe anal fin. The tongue is smooth.\n\nImmediately below the Nile Perch is the _Star-gazer_ (_Uranoscopus\nscaber_).\n\nThis Fish is found in the Mediterranean, and derives its name from the\nsingular mode in which the eyes are set in the head, so that it looks\nupwards instead of sideways. It is one of the mud-lovers, a fact which\naccounts for the peculiar position of the eyes. It is said to feed\nafter the fashion of the fishing-frog--_i.e._ by burying itself in the\nmud and attracting other Fishes by a worm-like appendage of its mouth,\nand pouncing on them before they are aware of their danger.\n\n [Illustration: FISH OF EGYPT AND PALESTINE.\n\n 1. NILE PERCH. 2. SURMULLET. 3. STAR-GAZER.\n\n \"_We remember the fish which we did eat in Egypt freely._\"--NUMB. xi.\n 5.]\n\nThis is not a pretty Fish, and as it is very spiny, is not pleasant to\nthe grasp, but its flesh is very good, and it is much valued by those\nwho can obtain it.\n\nThe last Fish to be noticed is the SURMULLET (_Mullus Surmuletus_), a\nFish that is equally remarkable for the beauty of its colours and the\nexcellence of its flesh.\n\n\n\n\nINVERTEBRATES.\n\n\n\n\nMOLLUSCS.\n\n The purple of Scripture--Various Molluscs from which it is\n obtained--The common Dog-Whelk of England--The sac containing\n the purple dye--Curious change of colour--Mode of obtaining the\n dye--The Tyrian purple--The king of the Ethiopians and the\n purple robe--The professional purple dyers--Various words\n expressive of different shades of purple--Care taken to keep the\n preparation of the dye secret.\n\n\nLeaving the higher forms of animal life, we now pass to the\nInvertebrated Animals which are mentioned in Scripture.\n\nAs may be inferred from the extreme looseness of nomenclature which\nprevails among the higher animals, the species which can be identified\nare comparatively few, and of them but a very few details are given in\nthe Scriptures.\n\nTaking them in their zoological order, we will begin with the\nMOLLUSCS.\n\n\nWe are all familiar with the value which was set by the ancients upon\nthe peculiar dye which may be called by the name of Imperial Purple.\nIn the first place, it was exceedingly costly, not only for its\nrichness of hue, but from the great difficulty with which a sufficient\nquantity could be procured for staining a dress. Purple was\nexclusively a royal colour, which might not be worn by a subject.\nAmong the ancient Romans, during the times of the C\u00e6sars, any one who\nventured to appear in a dress of purple would do so at the peril of\nhis life. In the consular days of Rome, the dress of the consuls was\nwhite, striped with purple; but the C\u00e6sars advanced another step in\nluxury, and dyed the whole toga of this costly hue.\n\nThe colour of the dye is scarcely what we understand by the term\n\"purple,\" _i.e._ a mixture of blue and red. It has but very little\nblue in it, and has been compared by the ancients to the colour of\nnewly-clotted blood. It is obtained from several Molluscs belonging\nto the great Whelk family, the chief of which is the _Murex\nbrandaris_. Another species is _Murex trunculus_, another is _Purpura\nh\u00e6mastoma_, and we have a fourth on our own coast, the common\nDog-Whelk, or Dog-Periwinkle (_Purpura lapillus_).\n\nThe shell is shaped something like that of a whelk, but is very smooth\nand porcelain-like, and is generally white, ornamented with several\ncoloured bands. It is, however, one of the most variable of shells,\ndiffering not only in colour but in form. It always inhabits the belt\nof the shore between tide-marks, and preys upon other Molluscs, such\nas the mussel and periwinkle, literally licking them to pieces with\nits long riband tongue.\n\nThis tongue is beset with rows of hooked teeth, exactly like the\nshark-tooth weapons of the Samoan and Mangaian Islanders, and with it\nthe creature is enabled to bore through the shells of mussels and\nsimilar Molluscs, and to eat the enclosed animal. It is very\ndestructive to periwinkles, thrusting its tongue through the mouth of\nthe shell, piercing easily the operculum by which the entrance is\nclosed, and gradually scooping out the unfortunate inmate.\n\nEven the bivalves, which can shut themselves up between two shells,\nfare no better, the tongue of the Dog-Whelk rasping a hole in the hard\nshell in eight-and-forty hours.\n\nAny of my readers who desire to obtain a very fair specimen of the old\nimperial purple can do so without difficulty.\n\nLet him go down to the sea-shore, and collect a number of\nDog-Whelks--a task of no difficulty, as a bushel may be obtained in a\nvery short time. Let him provide himself with a piece of perfectly\nclean linen, or pure white woollen fabric, and a pair of fine scissors\nor a sharp knife.\n\nIn order to procure the animal, the shell must be broken with a sharp\nblow of a small hammer, and the receptacle of the colouring matter can\nthen be seen behind the head, and recognised by its lighter hue.\n\nWhen it is opened, a creamy sort of matter exudes. It is yellowish,\nand gives no promise of its future richness of hue. There is only one\ndrop of this matter in each animal, and it is about sufficient in\nquantity to stain a piece of linen the size of a sixpence.\n\nThe best mode of seeing the full beauty of the purple is to take a\nnumber of the Molluscs, and to stain as large a surface as possible.\nThe piece of linen should then be exposed to the rays of the sun, when\nit will go through a most curious series of colours. The yellow begins\nto turn green, and, after a while, the stained portions of the linen\nwill be entirely green, the yellow having been vanquished by the blue.\nBy degrees the blue predominates more and more over the yellow, until\nthe linen is no more green, but blue. Then, just as the yellow yielded\nto the blue, the blue yields to red, and becomes first violet, then\npurple, and lastly assumes the blood-red hue of royalty.\n\nThe colour is very permanent, and, instead of fading by time, seems\nrather to brighten. Some two hundred years ago there was an\nestablished trade in this dye in Ireland; but it has long ago been\ncrushed by the cheaper, though less permanent, dyes which have since\nbeen invented.\n\nIn some cases the ancients appear not to have troubled themselves with\nthe complicated operation of taking the animal out of the shell,\nopening the receptacle, and squeezing the contents on the fabric to be\ndyed, but simply crushed the whole of the Mollusc, so as to set the\ncolouring matter free, and steeped the cloth in the pulp. Tyre was one\nof the most celebrated spots for this manufacture, the \"Tyrian dye\"\nbeing celebrated for its richness. Heaps of broken shells remain to\nthe present day as memorials of the long-perished manufacture.\n\nThe value which the ancients set upon this dye is shown by many\npassages in various books. Among others we may refer to Herodotus.\n\nCambyses, it appears, had a design to make war upon three nations, the\nAmmonians, the Carthaginians, and the Ethiopians. He determined to\ninvade the first by land, and the second by sea; but, being ignorant\nof the best method of reaching the Ethiopians, he dispatched\nmessengers to them, nominally as ambassadors, but practically as\nspies. He sent to the King of Ethiopia valuable presents--namely, a\npurple mantle, a golden necklace and bracelet, an elaborate box of\nperfumed ointment, and a cask of palm-wine, these evidently being\nconsidered a proof of imperial magnificence.\n\nThe Ethiopian king ridiculed the jewels, praised the wine, and asked\ncuriously concerning the dye with which the purple mantle was stained.\nOn being told the mode of preparation, he refused to believe the\nvisitors, and, referring to the changing hues of the mantle and to the\nperfume of the ointment, he showed his appreciation of their real\ncharacter by saying that the goods were deceptive, and so were the\nbearers.\n\nThis curious narrative occurs in the third book, chaps. 19-22.\n\nThe same historian has in another place a passing allusion to the\ntrade of catching the purple-producing whelks. In his fourth book,\nchap. 151, he mentions a man who was a purple-dyer by trade, the word\nsignifying equally one who procures the Molluscs as one who dyes the\nthreads of which the purple fabrics are woven.\n\nThe dye-producing power is not restricted to the whelks, but is shared\nby other Molluscs. For example, the Diadem Staircase Shell (_Scalaria\ndiadema_) secretes a substance which produces a purple hue, and the\n_Cerithium telescopium_ produces a dye which retains its green hue,\ninstead of passing into blue and red.\n\nThe Hebrew word _argaman_, which signifies the regal purple, occurs\nseveral times in Scripture, and takes a slightly different form\naccording to the Chaldaic or Hebraic idiom.\n\nFor example, we find it in Exod. xxv. 4: \"This is the offering which\nye shall take of them: gold, and silver, and brass,\n\n\"And blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen,\" &c. &c.\n\nIt occurs again in 2 Chron. ii. 7: \"Send me now therefore a man\ncunning to work in gold, and in silver, and in brass, and in iron, and\nin purple, and crimson, and blue.\" These words are repeated in ver.\n14.\n\nA very important use of this word is found in Dan. v. 7: \"And the king\nspake, and said to the wise men of Babylon, Whosoever shall read this\nwriting, and show me the interpretation thereof, shall be clothed with\nscarlet\" (\"purple\" in margin), \"and have a chain of gold about his\nneck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.\" Here we find that\nthe dye in question was a regal one, that the wearing it was a matter\nof sumptuary law, and that the fact of being allowed to wear it was a\nsign that the wearer was of the very highest rank.\n\nThe Jewish Bible invariably translates the word as \"red-purple.\"\n\nThat the preparers of the precious purple colour took care to preserve\ntheir art a secret, is evident from the writings of the Talmudists,\nwho had the very vaguest ideas respecting the dye. They knew that it\nwas obtained from a marine Mollusc, but thought that the creature only\nmade its appearance once in seventy years, and that this scarcity was\nthe cause of its costliness. They said that the dye obtained from one\nsea was blackish, evidently referring to the ink of the cuttle; that\nwhen it was obtained from another it was violet, and that the\nPhoenician waters alone produced the true red-purple hue.\n\nThey accounted for its colour by saying that the animal took the\ncolour of the sea which it inhabited: the sea was like the sky which\nit reflected, the sky was like the throne of God, and the throne of\nGod was like the sapphire. Therefore, the dye was like the sapphire.\nIt is not impossible even that the dyers exhibited specimens of the\nViolet Snail, or Janthina, which is of a rich blue colour, and which\nwould readily be accepted as the source of the Tyrian dye.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SNAIL.\n\n The Snail which melteth--Rendering of the Jewish Bible--Theory\n respecting the track of the Snail--The Hebrew word\n _Shablul_--Various Snails of Palestine.\n\n\nThere is a very remarkable and not very intelligible passage in Ps.\nlviii. 8: \"As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away.\"\nThe Jewish Bible renders the passage in a way which explains the idea\nwhich evidently prevailed at the time when the Psalms were composed:\n\"As a snail let him melt as he passeth on.\"\n\nThe ancients had an idea that the slimy track made by a Snail as it\ncrawled along was subtracted from the substance of its body, and that\nin consequence the farther it crept, the smaller it became, until at\nlast it wasted entirely away. The commentators on the Talmud took this\nview of the case. The Hebrew word _shablul_, which undoubtedly does\nsignify a Snail of some kind, is thus explained: \"The Shablul is a\ncreeping thing: when it comes out of its shell, saliva pours from\nitself, until it becomes liquid, and so dies.\"\n\nOther explanations of this passage have been offered, but there is no\ndoubt that the view taken by these commentators is the correct one,\nand that the Psalmist, when he wrote the terrible series of\ndenunciations in which the passage in question occurs, had in his mind\nthe popular belief regarding the gradual wasting away of the Snail as\nit \"passeth on.\"\n\nIt is needless to say that no particular species of Snail is\nmentioned, and almost as needless to state that in Palestine there are\nmany species of Snails, to any or all of which these words are equally\napplicable.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ONYCHA.\n\n Ingredients of the sacred incense--The Onyx, or\n Onycha--Derivation of the word--The Arabic Dofr--The Doofu of\n Abyssinia--Odour of the perfume.\n\n\nIn Exod. xxx. 34 there occurs a remarkable word, _shecheleth_, which\nis used to describe one of the ingredients of the incense to be used\nin Divine worship. The Jewish Bible renders the word rightly,\n\"onycha,\" while Buxtorf renders it by \"onyx,\" a word which is likely\nto mislead the reader, and to cause him to believe it to be a mineral,\nand not an animal substance.\n\nThe Onycha is the operculum of one of the Strombi or Wing-shells, and\nderives its name from the resemblance which it bears in those shells\nto a nail or claw. The Greek word _onyx_ primarily signifies a nail,\nand is indeed the origin of our own word. Secondarily, it is used to\ndenote a precious stone, partly because the white bands of the\nsardonyx bear some resemblance to the white semi-lunar marks at the\nbase of human nails. In consequence of the resemblance of the\noperculum to a claw or nail, the Arabs call the Wing-shell\n\"Dofr-el-afrit,\" or Afrit's (_i.e._ demon's) claw.\n\nThe operculum of the Wing-shells has a sharp and powerful scent when\nburned, and, when mixed with substances more fragrant but less\npowerful, it has the effect of adding to their potency if not to their\nfragrance.\n\nA remarkable corroboration of this rendering occurs in Mr. Mansfield\nParkyns's valuable \"Life in Abyssinia.\" In the Appendix to vol. i. in\nwhich the commerce of Abyssinia and the Red Sea is described, the\nfollowing entry occurs:--\"_October 5, 1848._ Sailed for Suakim in a\nnative boat. Cargo: muslins, marawdi, Surat tobacco, sandal-wood, and\ndoofu. This article is the operculum or horny substance with which\nsome species of shell-fish are furnished to protect the mouth of their\nshells. These in some parts of Nubia are used for perfume, being burnt\nwith sandal-wood.\"\n\nHere we have one or two points worthy of notice. In the first place,\nit is evident that the Doofu of the Abyssinians is identical with the\nDofr of the Arabs. In the second place we find that it is not used\nalone as a perfume, but is burned together with the fragrant\nsandal-wood. Lastly, we find that the materials of the incense which\nwere ordained for the special use of the Jewish worship were derived\nfrom North-Eastern Africa, and were in all probability familiar to the\nJews from their long residence in Egypt.\n\nThe opercula of all the Strombid\u00e6 possess this powerful, though not\nvery fragrant odour, which has been compared to that of spices, or\ncastoreum, and probably acts the part which is played in many modern\nperfumes by materials which in themselves possess an odour the reverse\nof fragrant.\n\nThe mineral onyx is represented by a different Hebrew word, namely,\n_shoham_.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PEARL.\n\n The Pearl of Scripture--Wisdom compared to Pearl--Different\n renderings of the Hebrew word--Opinions of the\n Talmudists--Structure of Pearls--The Pearls of the marine and\n aquatic mussels--Pearl-fisheries of the Conway--Metaphorical\n uses of the Pearl--The Pearl of great price--Casting Pearls\n before swine--An ancient proverb.\n\n\nThere is only one passage in the Old Testament in which can be found\nthe word which is translated as PEARL, and it is certain that the word\nin question may have another interpretation.\n\nThe word in question is _gabish_, and occurs in Job xxviii. 18.\nTreating of wisdom, in that magnificent passage beginning, \"But where\nshall Wisdom be found, and where is the place of understanding?\" the\nsacred writer uses these words, \"No mention shall be made of coral, or\nof pearls: for the price of wisdom is above rubies.\" This is the only\npassage in the Bible which contains the word in its simple form, but\nthere are two others in which it is found with the addition of the\nsyllable _el_, connected with the word _abne_, or stone. In this form,\nit is translated in the Authorized Version as \"hailstones.\"\n\nSee Ezek. xiii. 11: \"Say unto them which daub it with untempered\nmorter, that it shall fall: there shall be an overflowing shower; and\nye, O great Hailstones, shall fall; and a stormy wind shall rend it.\"\nAlso xxxviii. 22: \"And I will plead against him with pestilence and\nwith blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the\nmany people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great\nHailstones, fire, and brimstone.\"\n\nThe Jewish Bible accepts the rendering of \"hailstones\" in both these\npassages, but affixes the mark of doubt to the word, whereas in Job\nxxviii. 18 it translates the word _gabish_ as \"pearls\" without using\nany mark of doubt. In Buxtorfs Hebrew Lexicon, the word is translated\nas \"_Unio, Margarita pretiosa._\" It is not, however, difficult to see\nthat the word _gabish_ may primarily signify either ice or Pearl, and\nthat the one may have been used metaphorically for the other.\n\nThe Talmudical writers had much to say on the subject of Pearls, but,\nbefore proceeding to their curious disquisitions, it will be as well\nto describe briefly the Pearl and its origin.\n\nWe are all familiar with the shining inner coating or \"nacre\"\npossessed by many bivalve molluscs, such as the common mussels and\noysters. This coating is sometimes found upon extraneous substances\ndeposited on the \"mantle\" of the animal, and then takes the name of\n\"Pearl.\" Sometimes these are found in the common oyster.\n\nFor example, I have before me some Pearls about as large as No. 5\nshot, that I took out of a single plateful of oysters. They are dull\nin colour and irregular in form, but they are perfect Pearls.\n\nThen the common edible mussel frequently contains Pearls, which,\nhowever, are almost invariably small, and comparatively valueless. It\nis mentioned by Pliny that Julius C\u00e6sar obtained in Britain a\nsufficient number of Pearls to cover a breastplate, which he dedicated\nto Venus, and hung in her temple. It is evident from Pliny's account\nthat the Pearls in question were small and comparatively valueless,\nand it has been shrewdly suggested that C\u00e6sar only presented them to\nthe goddess because the Roman ladies would not have worn them.\n\nThese Pearls were in all probability obtained from the common edible\nmussel which grows so abundantly on our coasts, and not, as has been\ngenerally thought, from the river Pearl-mussel, which really produces\nPearls of considerable value. The celebrated pearl-fishers of the\nConway employ the edible mussel, and sell the Pearls at a certain\nprice per ounce.\n\nThe scientific name of the river Pearl-shell is _Unio margaritiferus_,\nwhich is found in best condition in rapid mountain streams. It is\nplentiful in many of the Irish rivers, from which Pearls of\nconsiderable value have been procured. One of these Pearls, seen by\nSir R. Redding set in a necklace, was purchased for thirty pounds by\nthe owner, who had refused nearly three times the sum for it.\n\nPerhaps the most celebrated Pearl-mussel is that of the Chinese,\n_Dipsas plicatus_. This species attains a considerable size, a\nspecimen in my possession being seven inches in length and five in\nwidth.\n\n [Illustration: PEARL OYSTER.\n\n \"_And the twelve gates were twelve pearls._\"--REV. xxi. 21.]\n\nThe Chinese make a singular use of this mussel. They string a number\nof globular pellets, and introduce them between the valves of the\nmussel, so that in course of time the creature deposits a coating of\npearly substance upon them, and forms a very good imitation of real\nPearls. They also stamp little images, popularly called josses, out of\nmetal, and force the animal to cover them with nacre in a similar\nmanner. Six such josses are in my specimen. Frequently, however, these\nincorrigible imitators actually counterfeit the sham pearls, merely\ntaking the josses and pellets, laying them in shells from which the\nanimal has been removed, and washing them with a solution which, when\ndry, looks so like nacre that it cannot be distinguished from that\nsubstance without much difficulty.\n\nThe best Pearls are those which are procured from the well-known PEARL\nOYSTER (_Meleagrina margaritifera_), which is found in several parts\nof the world, and which constitutes the principal source of wealth to\nthe localities where it most abounds.\n\n\nThe Talmudical commentators wrote rather copiously about the Pearl,\nrespecting the nature of which they were somewhat perplexed, as it was\na gem and yet not a mineral. They thought that it lay at the bottom of\nthe sea, under flat, slab-like stones some of which had Pearls beneath\nthem, but the greater part were without them. In consequence of the\ndifficulty of diving and the precariousness of the search, a number of\nproverbs were current. For example, a person who persevered in some\nfruitless search was said to be a diver who brought up stones without\nPearls. If one person laboured and another took the credit, it was\nsaid that the one would not have found the Pearl if the other had not\nbrought up the stone.\n\nIn consequence of the labour and research required for seeking wisdom,\nit was proverbially likened to a Pearl, and in this sense we must\nunderstand the warning of our Lord, not to cast Pearls before swine.\nThe \"pearl of great price\" is another form of the same metaphor.\n\nThis metaphor holds good in almost all Oriental languages.\n\nThere is also a proverb which bears a curious resemblance to the\nwell-known \"painting the lily and gilding refined gold:\" \"Whoso\npraises a priceless pearl undervalues it.\"\n\n\n\n\nINSECTS.\n\n Insects--Beetles not mentioned in Scripture--The Locust--Various\n species of the insect, and different words used to signify\n it--The Arbeh of Scripture, and its derivation--The two\n migratory Locusts at rest and on the wing--The Locust\n swarms--Gordon Cumming's account--Progress of the insect\n hosts--Vain attempts to check them--Tossed up and down as a\n Locust--Effect of the winds on the insect--The east and the west\n winds--Locusts used for food--Ancient and modern travellers--The\n food of St. John.\n\n\nConsidering the vast variety of insects which are found in Egypt,\nSyria, and Palestine, it is somewhat remarkable that so few should be\nmentioned by name. Not one single coleopteran is mentioned; for,\nalthough the Hebrew word _chargol_, which occurs in Lev. xi. 21, 22,\nis rendered in the Authorized Version as \"beetle,\" the context shows\nthat it could not have been a coleopterous insect at all, but must\nhave belonged to the locusts. We will therefore pass to the insect\nnext in order.\n\n\nTHE LOCUST.\n\nOf the LOCUSTS there are several species in Palestine, two of which\nare represented in the accompanying plate. Those on the ground are the\ncommon Migratory Locusts (_OEdipoda migratoria_), while those on the\nwing, which have long heads, are a species of _Truxalis_.\n\nAt least four species of Locust are mentioned in the Scriptures, one\nof them being the beetle of the Authorized Version; and it is probable\nthat one or two words which are differently rendered in the Authorized\nVersion are either names of different species of Locusts, or are\nsynonyms for the same species.\n\nWe will first take the different Hebrew words which are translated as\n\"Locust,\" and then proceed to the description of the insects\nthemselves.\n\nThe first of those words is _arbeh_, about the rendering of which\nthere is no doubt whatever. It occurs many times in the Scriptures,\nand, even if its signification were doubtful, the context would be\nsufficient to denote the proper rendering of the word. Take, for\nexample, the account in Exod. x. of the threatened plague of Locusts.\nNothing can be more terse and graphic than the description of the\nArbeh, its vast multitudes, its sudden arrival, and its destructive\npower.\n\nIn Judges vi. 5 the word is translated as \"grasshopper.\" \"For they\ncame up with their cattle and their tents, and they came as\ngrasshoppers for multitude; for both they and their camels were\nwithout number: and they entered into the land to destroy it.\"\nTranslating the word rightly as \"Locust,\" we see the real force of\nthis passage. Grasshoppers may inhabit a spot, and do no great harm,\nbut the Locusts invade whole districts, coming like destructive armies\nupon it, and causing utter destruction as long as they remain.\n\nIn 1 Kings viii. 37, Solomon speaks of the presence of the Arbeh among\nthe most terrible calamities that can befall a country, and classes it\nwith famine, drought, pestilence, and siege. In Prov. xxx. 27 the same\nwriter remarks on the curious fact that these creatures are gregarious\nand migratory, and yet have no leader, as is mostly the case with\ngregarious animals. \"The locusts have no king, yet go they forth all\nof them by hands.\"\n\nAllusion is made to the vast number of the Arbeh in Jer. xlvi.: \"They\nshall cut down her forest, saith the Lord, though it cannot be\nsearched; because they are more than the grasshoppers, and are\ninnumerable.\" The voracity of the Arbeh is mentioned in Joel i. 4 and\nii. 25. These are but a few passages selected out of the many in which\nthe Arbeh is mentioned, in order to show how completely the word\ncorresponds with the character of the Locust. The word is derived from\na Hebrew root signifying multitudes, and is therefore appropriately\nused for these insects, which singly are so feeble, and collectively\nare so terrible.\n\nNext comes the word _chagab_, which evidently signifies some migratory\nand gregarious Locust, though we cannot say precisely to which species\nit refers. The word is mostly translated as \"grasshopper,\" and, from\nthe context of several passages, it seems to have been less in size\nthan the Arbeh, inasmuch as it is used as a metaphor to express\nsmallness. See, for example, Numb. xiii. 31-33, where is recorded the\nfalse report of the spies whom Moses sent to inspect the land. \"The\nmen that went up said, We be not able to go up against the people; for\nthey are stronger than we.\n\n\"And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had\nsearched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which\nwe have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants\nthereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great\nstature.\n\n\"And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the\ngiants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers\" (_chagabim_),\n\"and so we were in their sight.\"\n\nA similar metaphor is employed by the Prophet Isaiah: \"It is He that\nsitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are\nas grasshoppers\" (xl. 22). And in Eccles. xii. 5 extreme weakness is\nforcibly indicated by the words, \"the grasshopper\" (_chagab_) \"shall\nbe a burden.\"\n\nNow the two principal species of Locust which travel in bands and\ndevastate the country are the common Migratory Locust (_OEdipoda\nmigratoria_) and the _Acridium peregrinum_. If, therefore, the word\n_arbeh_ expresses one of these insects, it is probable that the word\n_chagab_ signifies the other.\n\nThe Bald Locust of Lev. xi. 22 is probably some species of _Truxalis_,\nthe insects belonging to this genus having long and smooth heads. The\nHebrew word is _sallom_, and the Jewish Bible leaves it untranslated.\nThe word _chargol_ which also occurs in the same passage, and is\ntranslated in the Authorized Version as \"beetle,\" is in all\nprobability a species of Locust, as it is classed with those insects\nwhich have \"legs above their feet to leap withal.\"\n\nBesides these words, we find that others translated as \"caterpillar,\"\n\"palmerworm,\" and \"cankerworm\" may be synonyms for the Locust, either\ndifferent species, or as expressing the same species in its various\nstages of development. (See Lepidoptera, page 632.)\n\nWe will now pass on to the insect and its habits, taking the Migratory\nLocust as the type of its family.\n\nThe Locust belongs to the great order of Orthoptera, or\nstraight-winged insects. They have, when fully developed, four wings,\nthe two front being thick and membraneous, while the two hinder wings\nare large, delicate, translucent, and folded longitudinally under the\nfront pair of wings when the insect is at rest. In the Locusts these\ncharacteristics are admirably shown. The appearance of a Locust when\nat rest and when flying is so different that the creature is at first\nsight scarcely recognisable as the same creature. When at rest, it is\na compact and tolerably stout insect, with a dull though delicately\ncoloured body; but when it takes flight it appears to attain twice its\nprevious dimensions.\n\nThe front pair of wings, which alone were seen before they were\nexpanded, became comparatively insignificant, while the hinder pair,\nwhich were before invisible, became the most prominent part of the\ninsect, their translucent folds being coloured with the most brilliant\nhues, according to the species. The body seems to have shrunk as the\nwings have increased, and to have diminished to half its previous\nsize, while the long legs that previously were so conspicuous are\nstretched out like the legs of a flying heron.\n\nAll the Locusts are vegetable-feeders, and do great harm wherever they\nhappen to be plentiful, their powerful jaws severing even the thick\ngrass stems as if cut by scissors. But it is only when they invade a\ncountry that their real power is felt. They come flying with the wind\nin such vast multitudes that the sky is darkened as if by\nthunder-clouds; and when they settle, every vestige of green\ndisappears off the face of the earth.\n\nMr. Gordon Cumming once saw a flight of these Locusts. They flew about\nthree hundred feet from the ground, and came on in thick, solid\nmasses, forming one unbroken cloud. On all sides nothing was to be\nseen but Locusts. The air was full of them, and the plain was covered\nwith them, and for more than an hour the insect army flew past him.\nWhen the Locusts settle, they eat with such voracity that the sound\ncaused by their jaws cutting the leaves and grass can be heard at a\ngreat distance; and even the young Locusts, which have no wings, and\nare graphically termed by the Dutch colonists of Southern Africa\n\"voet-gangers,\" or foot-goers, are little inferior in power of jaw to\nthe fully-developed insect.\n\nAs long as they have a favourable wind, nothing stops the progress of\nthe Locusts. They press forward just like the vast herds of antelopes\nthat cover the plains of Africa, or the bisons that blacken the\nprairies of America, and the progress of even the wingless young is\nas irresistible as that of the adult insects. Regiments of soldiers\nhave in vain attempted to stop them. Trenches have been dug across\ntheir path, only to be filled up in a few minutes with the advancing\nhosts, over whose bodies the millions of survivors continued their\nmarch. When the trenches were filled with water, the result was the\nsame; and even when fire was substituted for water, the flames were\nquenched by the masses of Locusts that fell into them. When they come\nto a tree, they climb up it in swarms, and devour every particle of\nfoliage, not even sparing the bark of the smaller branches. They\nascend the walls of houses that come in the line of their march,\nswarming in at the windows, and gnawing in their hunger the very\nwoodwork of the furniture.\n\nWe shall now see how true to nature is the terrible prophecy of Joel.\n\"A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick\ndarkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and\na strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more\nafter it, even to the years of many generations.\n\n\"A fire devoureth before them; and behind them a flame burneth: the\nland is as the garden of Eden before them, and behind them a desolate\nwilderness; yea, and nothing shall escape them.\n\n\"The appearance of them is as the appearance of horses; and as\nhorsemen, so shall they run.\n\n\"Like the noise of chariots on the tops of mountains shall they leap,\nlike the noise of a flame of fire that devoureth the stubble, as a\nstrong people set in battle array....\n\n\"They shall run like mighty men; they shall climb the wall like men of\nwar; and they shall march every one on his ways, and they shall not\nbreak their ranks:\n\n\"Neither shall one thrust another; they shall walk every one in his\npath: and when they fall upon the sword, they shall not be wounded.\n\n\"They shall run to and fro in the city; they shall run upon the wall,\nthey shall climb up upon the houses; they shall enter in at the\nwindows like a thief.\n\n\"The earth shall quake before them; the heavens shall tremble: the sun\nand the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their\nshining:\n\n\"And the Lord shall utter His voice before His army: for His camp is\nvery great\".(Joel ii. 2-11).\n\n [Illustration: THE LOCUST.\n\n \"All thy trees shall the locust consume.\"--DEUT. xxviii. 42.]\n\nNothing can be more vividly accurate than this splendid description of\nthe Locust armies. First we have the darkness caused by them as they\nfly like black clouds between the sun and the earth. Then comes the\ncontrast between the blooming and fertile aspect of the land before\nthey settle on it, and its utter desolation when they leave it. Then\nthe poet-prophet alludes to the rushing noise of their flight, which\nhe compares to the sound of chariots upon the mountains, and to the\ncompact masses in which they pass over the ground like soldiers on the\nmarch. The impossibility of checking them is shown in verse 8, and\ntheir climbing the walls of houses and entering the chambers in verse\n9.\n\nThere is one passage in the Scriptures which at first sight seems\nrather obscure, but is clear enough when we understand the character\nof the insect to which it refers: \"I am gone like the shadow when it\ndeclineth: I am tossed up and down as the locust\" (Ps. cix. 23).\n\nAlthough the Locusts have sufficient strength of flight to remain on\nthe wing for a considerable period, and to pass over great distances,\nthey have little or no command over the direction of their flight, and\nalways travel with the wind, just as has been mentioned regarding the\nquail. So entirely are they at the mercy of the wind, that if a sudden\ngust arises the Locusts are tossed about in the most helpless manner;\nand if they should happen to come across one of the circular\nair-currents that are so frequently found in the countries which they\ninhabit, they are whirled round and round without the least power of\nextricating themselves.\n\nThe course then of the Locust-swarms depends entirely on the direction\nof the wind. They are brought by the wind, and they are taken away by\nthe wind, as is mentioned in the sacred narrative. In the account of\nthe great plague of Locusts, the wind is mentioned as the proximate\ncause both of their arrival and their departure. See, for example,\nExod. x. 12, 13:\n\n\"And the Lord said unto Moses, Stretch out thine hand over the land of\nEgypt for the locusts, that they may come up upon the land of Egypt,\nand eat every herb of the land, even all that the hail hath left.\n\n\"And Moses stretched forth his rod over the land of Egypt, and the\nLord brought an east wind upon the land all that day, and all that\nnight; and when it was morning, the east wind brought the locusts.\"\n\nAfterwards, when Moses was brought before Pharaoh, and entreated to\nremove the plague which had been brought upon the land, the west wind\nwas employed to take the Locusts away, just as the east wind had\nbrought them.\n\n\"He went out from Pharaoh, and entreated the Lord.\n\n\"And the Lord turned a mighty strong west wind, which took away the\nlocusts, and cast them into the Red Sea; there remained not one locust\nin all the coasts of Egypt\" (Exod. x. 18, 19).\n\nModern travellers have given accounts of these Locust armies, which\nexactly correspond with the sacred narrative. One traveller mentions\nthat, after a severe storm, the Locusts were destroyed in such\nmultitudes, that they were heaped in a sort of wall, varying from\nthree to four feet in height, fifty miles in length, and almost\nunapproachable, on account of the odour of their decomposing bodies.\n\n\nWe now come to the use of Locusts as food.\n\nVery few insects have been recognised as fit for human food, even\namong uncivilized nations, and it is rather singular that the\nIsraelites, whose dietary was so scrupulously limited, should have\nbeen permitted the use of the Locust. These insects are, however,\neaten in all parts of the world which they frequent, and in some\nplaces form an important article of diet, thus compensating in some\nway for the amount of vegetable food which they consume.\n\nHerodotus, for example, when describing the various tribes of Libyans,\nmentions the use of the Locust as an article of diet. \"The Nasamones,\na very numerous people, adjoin these Auschis\u00e6 westward.... When they\nhave caught locusts, they dry them in the sun, reduce them to powder,\nand, sprinkling them in milk, drink them.\" (Melpomene, ch. 172.)\n\nThis is precisely the plan which is followed at the present day by the\nBosjesmans of Southern Africa.\n\nTo them the Locusts are a blessing, and not a plague. They till no\nground, so that they care nothing for crops, and they breed no cattle,\nso that they are indifferent about pasture land.\n\nWhen they see a cloud of Locusts in the distance they light great\nfires, and heap plenty of green boughs upon them, so as to create a\nthick smoke. The Locusts have no idea of avoiding these smoke columns,\nbut fly over the fires, and, stifled by the vapour, fall to the\nground, where they are caught in vast numbers by the Bosjesmans.\n\nWhen their captors have roasted and eaten as many as they can manage\nto devour, they dry the rest over the fires, pulverize them between\ntwo stones, and keep the meal for future use, mixing it with water,\nor, if they can get it, with milk.\n\nWe will now take a few accounts given by travellers of the present\nday, selecting one or two from many. Mr. W. G. Palgrave, in his\n\"Central and Eastern Arabia,\" gives a description of the custom of\neating Locusts. \"On a sloping bank, at a short distance in front, we\ndiscerned certain large black patches, in strong contrast with the\nwhite glisten of the soil around, and at the same time our attention\nwas attracted by a strange whizzing, like that of a flight of hornets,\nclose along the ground, while our dromedaries capered and started as\nthough struck with sudden insanity.\n\n\"The cause of all this was a vast swarm of locusts, here alighted in\ntheir northerly wanderings from their birthplace in the Dahna; their\ncamp extended far and wide, and we had already disturbed their\noutposts. These insects are wont to settle on the ground after sunset,\nand there, half-stupified by the night chill, await the morning rays,\nwhich warm them once more into life and movement.\n\n\"This time, the dromedaries did the work of the sun, and it would be\nhard to say which of the two were the most frightened, they or the\nlocusts. It was truly laughable to see so huge a beast lose his wits\nfor fear at the flight of a harmless, stingless Insect, for, of all\ntimid creatures, none equal this 'ship of the desert' for cowardice.\n\n\"But, if the beasts were frightened, not so their masters. I really\nthought they would have gone mad for joy. Locusts are here an article\nof food, nay, a dainty, and a good swarm of them is begged of Heaven\nin Arabia....\n\n\"The locust, when boiled or fried, is said to be delicious, and boiled\nand fried accordingly they are to an incredible extent. However, I\nnever could persuade myself to taste them, whatever invitations the\ninhabitants of the land, smacking their lips over large dishes full of\nentomological 'delicatesses,' would make me to join them. Barak\u00e0t\nventured on one for a trial. He pronounced it oily and disgusting, nor\nadded a second to the first: it is caviare to unaccustomed palates.\n\n\"The swarm now before us was a thorough godsend for our Arabs, on no\naccount to be neglected. Thirst, weariness, all were forgotten, and\ndown the riders leaped from their starting camels. This one spread out\na cloak, that one a saddle-bag, a third his shirt, over the unlucky\ncreatures, destined for the morning meal. Some flew away, whizzing\nacross our feet; others were caught, and tied up in sacks.\"\n\nMr. Mansfield Parkyns, in his \"Life in Abyssinia,\" mentions that the\ntrue Abyssinian will not eat the Locust, but that the negroes and\nArabs do so. He describes the flavour as being something between the\nburnt end of a quill and a crumb of linseed cake. The flavour,\nhowever, depends much on the mode of cooking, and, as some say, on the\nnature of the Locusts' food.\n\nSignor Pierotti states, in his \"Customs and Traditions of Palestine,\"\nthat Locusts are really excellent food, and that he was accustomed to\neat them, not from necessity, but from choice, and compares their\nflavour to that of shrimps.\n\nDr. Livingstone makes a similar comparison. In Palestine, Locusts are\neaten either roasted or boiled in salt and water, but, when preserved\nfor future use, they are dried in the sun, their heads, wings, and\nlegs picked off, and their bodies ground into dust. This dust has\nnaturally a rather bitter flavour, which is corrected by mixing it\nwith camel's milk or honey, the latter being the favourite substance.\n\nWe may now see that the food of St. John the Baptist was, like his\ndress, that of a people who lived at a distance from towns, and that\nthere was no more hardship in the one than in the other. Some\ncommentators have tried to prove that St. John fed on the fruit of the\nlocust or carob tree--the same that is used so much in this country\nfor feeding cattle; but there is not the least ground for such an\nexplanation. The account of his life, indeed, requires no explanation;\nLocust-dust, mixed with honey, being an ordinary article of food even\nat the present day.\n\n\n\n\nHYMENOPTERA.\n\nTHE BEE.\n\n The Hebrew word _Deb\u00f4rah_--The Honey Bee of Palestine--Abundance\n of Bees in the Holy Land--Habitations of the wild Bee--Hissing\n for the Bee--Bees in dead carcases--The honey of\n Scripture--Domesticated Bees and their hives--Stores of wild\n honey--The story of Jonathan--The Crusaders and the\n honey--Butter and honey--Oriental sweetmeats--The Dibs, or\n grape-honey, and mode of preparation--Wax, its use as a\n metaphor.\n\n\nPassing for the moment the order of insects called Neuroptera, which\nmay possibly be represented in the Scriptural writings by the\nTermites, which would be classed with the ants, we come to the vast\norder of Hymenoptera, of which we find several representatives.\nBeginning with that which is most familiar to us, we will take the\nBee, an insect which is frequently mentioned in the Scriptures, and to\nwhich indirect allusion is made in many passages, such as those which\nmention honey, honeycomb, and wax.\n\n\nFortunately, there is no doubt about the rendering of the Hebrew word\n_deb\u00f4rah_, which has always been acknowledged to be rightly translated\nas \"Bee.\" There has, however, been a difference of opinion as to the\nderivation of the word, some Hebraists thinking that it is derived\nfrom a word which signifies departure, or going forth, in allusion to\nits habit of swarming, while others derive it from the Hebrew dabar, a\nword which signifies speech, and is appropriate to the Bee on account\nof the varied sounds of its hum, which were supposed to be the\nlanguage of the insect.\n\nThe Honey Bee is exceedingly plentiful in Palestine, and in some parts\nof the country multiplying to such an extent that the precipitous\nravines in which it takes up its residence are almost impassable by\nhuman beings, so jealous are the Bees of their domains. Although the\nBee is not exactly the same species as that of our own country, being\nthe Banded Bee (_Apis fasciata_), and not the _Apis mellifica_, the\ntwo insects very much resemble each other in shape, colour, and\nhabits. Both of them share the instinctive dislike of strangers and\njealousy of intrusion, and the Banded Bee of Palestine has as great an\nobjection to intrusion as its congener of England.\n\n [Illustration: THE BEE.\n\n \"_They shall rest all of them in the desolate valleys and in the holes\n of the rocks._\"--ISA. vii. 19.]\n\nSeveral allusions are made in the Scriptures to this trait in the\ncharacter of the Bee. See, for example, Deut. i. 44: \"And the\nAmorites, which dwelt in that mountain, came out against you, and\nchased you, as bees do, and destroyed you in Seir, even unto Hormah.\"\nAll those who have had the misfortune to offend Bees will recognise\nthe truth of this metaphor, the Amorites swarming out of the mountain\nlike wild Bees out of the rocky clefts which serve them as hives, and\nchasing the intruder fairly out of their domains.\n\nA similar metaphor is employed in the Psalms: \"They compassed me\nabout; yea, they compassed me about; but in the name of the Lord I\nwill destroy them.\n\n\"They compassed me about like bees, they are quick as the fire of\nthorns, but in the name of the Lord I will destroy them.\"\n\nThere is another passage in which the Bee is mentioned in the light of\nan enemy: \"And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall\nhiss for the fly that is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt,\nand for the bee that is in the land of Assyria.\n\n\"And they shall come, and shall rest all of them in the desolate\nvalleys, and in the holes of the rocks, and upon all thorns, and upon\nall bushes\" (Isa. vii. 18, 19). Some commentators have thought that\nthe word which is translated as \"Bee\" may in this case refer to some\nnoxious fly, which, although it is not a Bee, and does not even belong\nto the same order of insects, has a sufficiently Bee-like appearance\nto cause it to be classed among the Bees by the non-zoological\nOrientals. The context, however, sets the question at rest; for the\nallusions to the resting of the insect in the holes of the rock, upon\nthe thorns, and on the bushes, clearly refers to the mode in which the\nHoney Bee throws off its swarms.\n\nThe custom of swarming is mentioned in one of the earlier books of\nScripture. The reader will remember that, after Samson had killed the\nlion which met him on the way, he left the carcase alone. The various\ncarnivorous beasts and birds at once discover such a banquet, and in a\nvery short time the body of a dead animal is reduced to a hollow\nskeleton, partially or entirely covered with skin, the rays of the sun\ndrying and hardening the skin until it is like horn.\n\nIn exceptionally hot weather, the same result occurs even in this\ncountry. Some years before this account was written there was a very\nhot and dry summer, and a great mortality took place among the sheep.\nSo many indeed died that at last their owners merely flayed them, and\nleft their bodies to perish. One of the dead sheep had been thrown\ninto a rather thick copse, and had fallen in a spot where it was\nsheltered from the wind, and yet exposed to the fierce heat of the\nsummer's sun. The consequence was that in a few days it was reduced to\na mere shell. The heat hardened and dried the external layer of flesh\nso that not even the carnivorous beetles could penetrate it, while the\nwhole of the interior dissolved into a semi-putrescent state, and was\nrapidly devoured by myriads of blue-bottles and other larv\u00e6.\n\nIt was so thoroughly dried that scarcely any evil odour clung to it,\nand as soon as I came across it the story of Samson received a simple\nelucidation. In the hotter Eastern lands, the whole process would have\nbeen more rapid and more complete, and the skeleton of the lion, with\nthe hard and horny skin strained over it, would afford exactly the\nhabitation of which a wandering swarm of Bees would take advantage. At\nthe present day swarms of wild Bees often make their habitations\nwithin the desiccated bodies of dead camels that have perished on the\nway.\n\nAs to the expression \"hissing\" for the Bee, the reader must bear in\nmind that a sharp, short hiss is the ordinary call in Palestine, when\none person desires to attract the attention of another. A similar\nsound, which may perhaps be expressed by the letters _tst_, prevails\non the Continent at the present day. Signor Pierotti remarks that the\ninhabitants of Palestine are even now accustomed to summon Bees by a\nsort of hissing sound.\n\nWhether the honey spoken of in the Scriptures was obtained from wild\nor domesticated Bees is not very certain, but, as the manners of the\nEast are much the same now as they were three thousand years ago, it\nis probable that Bees were kept then as they are now. The hives are\nnot in the least like ours, but are cylindrical vases of coarse\nearthenware, laid horizontally, much like the bark hives employed in\nmany parts of Southern Africa.\n\nIn some places the hives are actually built into the walls of the\nhouses, the closed end of the cylinder projecting into the interior,\nwhile an entrance is made for the Bees in the other end, so that the\ninsects have no business in the house. When the inhabitants wish to\ntake the honey, they resort to the operation which is technically\ntermed \"driving\" by bee-masters.\n\nThey gently tap the end within the house, and continue the tapping\nuntil the Bees, annoyed by the sound, have left the hive. They then\ntake out the circular door that closes the end of the hive, remove as\nmuch comb as they want, carefully put back those portions which\ncontain grubs and bee-bread, and replace the door, when the Bees soon\nreturn and fill up the gaps in the combs. As to the wasteful, cruel,\nand foolish custom of \"burning\" the Bees, the Orientals never think of\npractising it.\n\nIn many places the culture of Bees is carried out to a very great\nextent, numbers of the earthenware cylinders being piled on one\nanother, and a quantity of mud thrown over them in order to defend\nthem from the rays of the sun, which would soon melt the wax of the\ncombs.\n\nIn consequence of the geographical characteristics of the Holy Land,\nwhich supplies not only convenient receptacles for the Bees in the\nrocks, but abundance of thyme and similar plants, vast stores of\nbee-comb are to be found in the cliffs, and form no small part of the\nwealth of the people.\n\nReference to this kind of property is made by the Prophet Jeremiah.\nWhen Ishmael, the son of Nethaniah, had treacherously killed Gedaliah\nand others, ten men tried to propitiate him by a bribe: \"Slay us not,\nfor we have treasures in the field, of wheat, of barley, and of oil,\nand of _honey_\" (chap. xli. 8). References to the wild honey are\nfrequent in the Scriptures. For example, in the magnificent song of\nMoses the Lord is said to have made Israel to \"suck honey out of the\nrock\" (Deut. xxxii. 13). See also Psalm lxxxi. 16: \"He should have fed\nthem also with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock\nshould I have satisfied thee.\"\n\nThe abundance of wild honey is shown by the memorable events recorded\nin 1 Sam. xiv. Saul had prohibited all the people from eating until\nthe evening. Jonathan, who had not heard the prohibition, was faint\nand weary, and, seeing honey dripping on the ground from the abundance\nand weight of the comb, he took it up on the end of his staff, and ate\nsufficient to restore his strength.\n\nThus, if we refer again to the history of St. John the Baptist and his\nfood, we shall find that he was in no danger of starving for want of\nnourishment, the Bees breeding abundantly in the desert places he\nfrequented, and affording him a plentiful supply of the very material\nwhich was needed to correct the deficiencies of the dried locusts\nwhich he used instead of bread.\n\nThe expression \"a land flowing with milk and honey\" has become\nproverbial as a metaphor expressive of plenty. Those to whom the words\nwere spoken understood it as something more than a metaphor. In the\nwork to which reference has already been made Signor Pierotti writes\nas follows:--\"Let us now see how far the land could be said to flow\nwith milk and honey during the latter part of its history and at the\npresent day.\n\n\"We find that honey was abundant in the time of the Crusades, for the\nEnglish, who followed Edward I. to Palestine, died in great numbers\nfrom the excessive heat, and from eating too much fruit and honey.\n(See M. Sanutus, '_Liber secretorum fidelium Crucis_,' lib. iii. p.\nxii.)\n\n\"At the present day, after traversing the country in every direction,\nI am able to affirm that in the south-east and north-east, where the\nancient customs of the patriarchs are most fully preserved, and the\neffects of civilization have been felt least, milk and honey may still\nbe said to flow, as they form a portion of every meal, and may even be\nmore abundant than water, which fails occasionally in the heat of\nsummer.... I have often eaten of the comb, which I found very good and\nof delicious fragrance.\"\n\nA reference to sickness occasioned by eating too much honey occurs in\nProv. xxv. 16: \"Hast thou found honey? Eat so much as is sufficient\nfor thee, lest thou be filled therewith, and vomit it.\" A similar\nwarning is given in verse 27: \"It is not good to eat much honey: so\nfor men to search their own glory is not glory.\"\n\nSo plentiful indeed was the wild honey that it was exported to other\ncountries, and in the palmy days of Israel formed part of a regular\ntrade with Tyre. See Ezek. xxvii. 17: \"Judah and the land of Israel,\nthey were thy merchants: they traded in thy market wheat of Minnith,\nand Pannag, and honey, and oil, and balm.\"\n\nIn one or two passages honey is mentioned as being eaten with butter.\n(See, for example, 2 Sam. xvii. 29.) When David and his followers were\nwearied at Mahanaim, the people brought presents to him, among which\nare specially mentioned butter and honey.\n\nThen there is the familiar prophecy, \"Behold a virgin shall conceive\nand bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey\nshall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil and choose the\ngood.\" The same image is repeated in the same chapter: \"And it shall\ncome to pass for the abundance of milk that they shall give he shall\neat butter: for butter and honey shall every one eat that is left in\nthe land\" (ver. 22).\n\nThis mixture is at the present day a favourite one. All Orientals are\nfond of sweets, and in the composition of many of their favourite\nsweetmeats use honey instead of sugar. But an extemporized sweetmeat\nis often made by mixing together honey and butter, and eating it\nwithout further preparation.\n\n\nIt is right to mention here that there is a substance which is\nsometimes called honey, but which is not made by Bees. This is still\nused in Palestine under the name of \"dibs,\" a word which is almost\nidentical with the Hebrew _d'bash_. A very excellent account of this\npreparation is given by Mr. Urquhart in his \"Lebanon.\" \"The dibs, the\nhoney of Scripture, which Jacob sent to Joseph, is the inspissated\njuice of the grape. It is of two sorts: one dark and liquid,\nresembling molasses--this is the _racon_; the other is thick, and of a\nyellow brown, and is called dibs (_jibes_). In every village there is\nan establishment for making it, some of them bearing marks of great\nantiquity. There are vats for pressing, and troughs cut in the rock\nfor holding the juice, and a furnace for boiling it.\n\n\"The grapes are not trodden by the feet, but laid in a heap and\npressed by a beam, of which one end is fixed in the wall, and a heavy\nstone attached to the other, as the oil seems anciently to have been\nexpressed, judging from the relics I observed near Tyre. The juice is\nthen boiled in the iron pan for an hour, then poured back into the\ntrough. After it has cooled it is again returned into the pan and\nboiled--if for the racon for three hours, if for the jibes four.\n\n\"The process is thus complete for the first; the second is still\nliquid, and is conveyed home, where, during a month, it is daily for\nan hour turned or beaten with a fresh branch of fig-tree, or botun.\nThis property of the fig-tree is curious.... The racon takes four okes\nof grapes to make one oke; the jibes five. The first is worth forty\nparas, and the second sixty.\"\n\n\nThe Hebrew word _donag_, which has been rightly interpreted as wax,\noccurs very seldom in the Old Testament. No mention is made of any use\nto which it was put, and in every instance it is employed simply as a\nmetaphor.\n\nThree examples occur in the Psalms: \"I am poured out like water, and\nall my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in\nthe midst of my bowels\" (Psa. xxii. 14).\n\nThe word occurs again in Psa. lxviii. 2: \"As smoke is driven away, so\ndrive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked\nperish at the presence of God.\" It occurs for the third time in Psa.\nxcvii. 5: \"The hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, at\nthe presence of the Lord of the whole earth.\"\n\nThe Prophet Micah uses a similar image: \"Behold the Lord cometh forth\nout of His place, and will come down, and tread upon the high places\nof the earth.\n\n\"And the mountains shall be molten under him, and the valleys shall be\ncleft, as wax before the fire, and as the waters that are poured down\na steep place.\" (i. 3, 4.)\n\nThe Bee represented on page 606 is the common Bee of Palestine, _Apis\nfasciata_. The lowest figure in the corner, with a long body and shut\nwings, is the queen. The central figure represents the drone,\nconspicuous by means of his large eyes, that almost join each other at\nthe top of the head, and for his thicker and stouter body, while the\nthird figure represents the worker Bee. Near them is shown the\nentrance to one of the natural hives which are so plentiful in the\nHoly Land, and are made in the \"clefts of the rocks.\" A number of Bees\nare shown issuing from the hole.\n\n\n\n\nTHE HORNET.\n\n The Tzirah or Hornet of Scripture--Travellers driven away by\n Hornets--The Hornet used as metaphor--Oriental symbolism--The\n Talmudical writers--Sting of the Hornet.\n\n\nStill keeping to the hymenopterous insects, we come to the Hornet.\nThere are three passages in which occurs the word _tzirah_, which has\nbeen translated as Hornet. In every case when the word is mentioned\nthe insect is employed in a metaphorical sense. See, for example,\nExod. xxiii. 27, 28: \"I will send my fear before thee, and will\ndestroy all the people to whom thou shalt come; and I will make all\nthine enemies turn their backs unto thee.\n\n\"And I will send hornets before thee, which shall drive out the\nHivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from before thee.\"\n\nA similar use of the word is made in Deut. vii. 20: \"Moreover the Lord\nthy God will send the hornet among them, until they that are left, and\nhide themselves from thee, be destroyed.\"\n\nThe fulfilment of this promise is recorded in Josh. xxiv. 11, 12: \"And\nye went over Jordan, and came unto Jericho: and the men of Jericho\nfought against you, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the\nCanaanites, and the Hittites, and the Girgashites, the Hivites, and\nthe Jebusites; and I delivered them into your hand.\n\n\"And I sent the hornet before you, which drave them out from before\nyou, even the two kings of the Amorites; but not with thy sword, nor\nwith thy bow.\"\n\nIt is most probable that in these passages the word is used rather as\na metaphor than as the statement of a fact, and that under the symbol\nof the Hornet was signified some means whereby the people should be\ndriven out of the land as men are driven when chased by angry Hornets.\nThe reader may remember that the word \"bee\" is more than once used in\na similar manner. This view of the case is corroborated by such\npassages as Deut. ii. 25: \"This day will I begin to put the dread of\nthee, and the fear of thee, upon the nations that are under the whole\nheaven, who shall hear report of thee, and shall tremble, and be in\nanguish because of thee.\" Also Josh. ii. 9-11: \"I know that the Lord\nhath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and\nthat all the inhabitants of the land faint because of you.\n\n [Illustration: THE HORNET.\n\n \"_I will send hornets before thee_.\"--EXOD. xxiii. 28.]\n\n\"For we have heard how the Lord dried up the water of the Red Sea for\nyou, when ye came out of Egypt; and what ye did unto the two kings of\nthe Amorites, that were on the other side Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom\nye utterly destroyed.\n\n\"And as soon as we had heard these things, our hearts did melt,\nneither did there remain any more courage in any man, because of you.\"\n\nThe Hornet affords a most appropriate image for such a promise as was\nmade to the Israelites, and was one which they must have thoroughly\ncomprehended. The Hornets of Palestine and the neighbouring countries\nare far more common than our own Hornets in England, and they\nevidently infested some parts to such an extent that they gave their\nname to those spots. Thus the word _Zoreah_, which is mentioned in\nJosh. xv. 33, signifies the \"place of Hornets.\"\n\nThey make their nests in various ways; some species placing them\nunderground, and others disposing them as shown in the illustration,\nand merely sheltering them from the elements by a paper cover. Such\nnests as these would easily be disturbed by the animals which\naccompanied the Israelites on their journeys, even if the people were\ncareful to avoid them. In such a case, the irritated insects rush out\nat the intruders; and so great is the terror of their stings, that men\nand beasts fly promiscuously in every direction, each only anxious to\nescape from the winged foes.\n\nThe recollection of such scenes would necessarily dwell in the memory\nof those who had taken part in them, and cause the metaphor to impress\nitself strongly upon them.\n\nIt is needless to say that the passages in question might be literal\nstatements of facts, and that the various nations were actually driven\nout of their countries by Hornets. Let the insects be brought upon the\nland in sufficient numbers, and neither man nor beast could stay in\nit. It is not likely, however, that such a series of miracles, far\nexceeding the insect-plagues of Egypt, would have been worked without\nfrequent references to them in the subsequent books of the Scriptures;\nand, moreover, the quick, short, and headlong flight of the attack of\nHornets is a very different thing from the emigration which is\nmentioned in the Scriptures, and the long journeys which such a\nproceeding involved.\n\nThe Talmudical writers inclined to the literal view of the passage,\nand dilated on the terrible power of the Hornet, four of which could\ndestroy a horse, and one kill a boy nine years of age, or a man,\nprovided he were stung in the forehead. The sting of the Hornet is\nvery severe indeed, exceeding in virulence that of the wasp, to which\nit is closely allied; and it is possible that a boy, or even a man,\nmight be in so feeble a state of health, or be naturally so sensitive\nto poison, that the sting of a Hornet would be fatal. As a rule,\nhowever, the sting of the Hornet, although exceedingly painful, is\nscarcely more injurious than that of a bee or wasp. The Talmudists\nstated that the Hornets mentioned in Joshua killed the people by\nstinging them in the eye.\n\nThe species of Hornet represented in the illustration is _Vespa\norientalis_, the insect and nest being drawn from specimens in the\nBritish Museum.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ANT.\n\n The Ant of Scripture--Solomon's allusion to the Ant--Habit of\n laying up stores of food--A controversy respecting the Ant--The\n Ants of Palestine, and their habits--The Agricultural or\n Mound-making Ant--Preparing ground, sowing, tending, reaping,\n and storing the crop--Different habits of Ants--Development of\n the insect--The winged Ants--An Arab proverb.\n\n\nThere are two short passages in the Old Testament, around which an\nanimated controversy has long raged. They both occur in the Book of\nProverbs.\n\nThe first is found in chap. vi. 6-8: \"Go to the ant, thou sluggard;\nconsider her ways, and be wise:\n\n\"Which, having no guide, overseer, or ruler,\n\n\"Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the\nharvest.\"\n\nThe Jewish Bible renders the passage in almost exactly the same\nmanner: \"Go to the ant, thou sluggard; see her ways, and be wise:\n\n\"Which having no captain, bailiff, or ruler,\n\n\"Provideth her bread in the summer, and gathereth her food in the\nharvest.\"\n\nThe second passage is of a similar character: \"There be four things\nwhich are little upon the earth, but they are exceeding wise.\n\n\"The ants are a people not strong, yet they prepare their meat in the\nsummer.\"\n\nIt has been objected to these passages that the Ant is a carnivorous\ninsect, and therefore could not gather her food in the harvest, and\nthat the very nature of that food would prevent it from being laid up\nin store. The objectors thought that the sacred writer had been\ndeceived by appearances, and had mistaken the white cocoon of the\nant-pup\u00e6 (popularly called ant-eggs among ourselves) for grains of\ncorn which they were storing away for future use.\n\nThose who took the other side of the question answered that, in the\nfirst place, it was necessary to be sure of the real translation of\nthe word which is rendered as \"ant\" in the Authorized Version; and\nthat, in the second place, the Ants of a warm country like Palestine\nmight have different habits from those which inhabit the comparatively\ncold and changeable climate of England.\n\nAs to the first point, there is no doubt that the rendering is the\nright one, and that the word _nem\u00e2lah_ is correctly translated as\n\"ant.\" The Jewish Bible employs the word \"ant,\" and does not add the\nmark of doubt. Buxtorf, in his \"Hebrew Lexicon,\" translates it as\n\"formica,\" and derives it from a root which signifies \"to eat,\"\nbecause it eat the seeds which it conveys to its dwelling. The\nlexicographer here alludes to a belief that when the Ant carries a\ngrain of corn into its home, it bites off the germ, so as to prevent\nit from sprouting.\n\nIn Palestine Ants abound, and the species are tolerably numerous.\nAmong them are found some species which do convey seeds into their\nsubterranean home; and if their stores should be wetted by the heavy\nrains which sometimes prevail in that country, bring them to the outer\nair, as soon as the weather clears up, and dry them in the sun.\n\nThe writer of the Proverbs was therefore perfectly right when he\nalluded to the vegetable stores within the nest, and only spoke the\ntruth when he wrote of the Ant that it was exceeding wise. Any one who\nwishes to test the truth of his words can easily do so by watching the\nfirst Ants' nest which he finds, the species of the Ant not being of\nmuch consequence. The nests of the Wood-Ant are perhaps the best\nsuited for investigation, partly because the insect and its habitation\nare comparatively large, and, secondly, because so much of the work is\ndone above-ground.\n\nThe most wonderful Ant in the world is one which hitherto is only\nknown in some parts of America. Its scientific name is _Atta\nmalefaciens_, and it has been called by various popular names, such as\nthe Mound-making Ant and the Agricultural Ant on account of its\nhabits, and the Stinging Ant on account of the pungency of its venom.\nThis characteristic has gained for it the scientific name of\n_malefaciens_, or villanous.\n\nThe habits of this Ant were studied in Texas by Dr. Lincecum for the\nspace of twelve years, and the result of his investigations was\ncommunicated to the Linn\u00e6an Society by C. Darwin, Esq. His abstract of\nDr. Lincecum's observations may be found in the \"Journal of the\nLinn\u00e6an Society,\" vol. vi. No. 21, page 29. It is so extraordinary an\naccount that it must be given in the narrator's own words:--\n\n\"The following is merely an abstract of Dr. Lincecum's communication,\ncontaining only what appears to be most remarkable and novel in it in\nthe way of observation.\n\n\"The species which I have named 'Agricultural' is a large brownish\nant. It dwells in what may be termed paved cities, and, like a\nthrifty, diligent, provident farmer, makes suitable and timely\narrangements for the changing seasons. It is, in short, endowed with\nskill, ingenuity, and untiring patience sufficient to enable it\nsuccessfully to contend with the varying exigencies which it may have\nto encounter in the life-confiict.\n\n\"When it has selected a situation for its habitation, if on ordinary\ndry ground, it bores a hole, around which it raises the surface three\nand sometimes six inches, forming a low circular mound having a very\ngentle inclination from the centre to the outer border, which on an\naverage is three or four feet from the entrance. But if the location\nis chosen on low, flat, wet land liable to inundation, though the\nground may be perfectly dry at the time the ant sets to work, it\nnevertheless elevates the mound, in the form of a pretty sharp cone,\nto the height of fifteen to twenty inches or more, and makes the\nentrance near the summit. Around the mound in either case the ant\nclears the ground of all obstructions, levels and smooths the surface\nto the distance of three or four feet from the gate of the city,\ngiving the space the appearance of a handsome pavement, as it really\nis.\n\n\"Within this paved area not a blade of any green thing is allowed to\ngrow, except a single species of grain-bearing grass. Having planted\nthis crop in a circle around, and two or three feet from, the centre\nof the mound, the insect tends and cultivates it with constant care,\ncutting away all other grasses and weeds that may spring up amongst it\nand all around outside of the farm-circle to the extent of one or two\nfeet more.\n\n\"The cultivated grass grows luxuriantly, and produces a heavy crop of\nsmall, white, flinty seeds, which under the microscope very closely\nresemble ordinary rice. When ripe, it is carefully harvested, and\ncarried by the workers, chaff and all, into the granary cells, where\nit is divested of the chaff and packed away. The chaff is taken out\nand thrown beyond the limits of the paved area.\n\n\"During protracted wet weather, it sometimes happens that the\nprovision stores become damp, and are liable to sprout and spoil. In\nthis case, on the first fine day the ants bring out the damp and\ndamaged grain, and expose it to the sun till it is dry, when they\ncarry it back and pack away all the sound seeds, leaving those that\nhad sprouted to waste.\n\n\"In a peach-orchard not far from my house is a considerable elevation,\non which is an extensive bed of rock. In the sand-beds overlying\nportions of this rock are fine cities of the Agricultural ants,\nevidently very ancient. My observations on their manners and customs\nhave been limited to the last twelve years, during which time the\nenclosure surrounding the orchard has prevented the approach of cattle\nto the ant-farms. The cities which are outside of the enclosure as\nwell as those protected in it are, at the proper season, invariably\nplanted with the ant-rice. The crop may accordingly always be seen\nspringing up within the circle about the 1st of November every year.\n\n\"Of late years, however, since the number of farms and cattle has\ngreatly increased, and the latter are eating off the grass much closer\nthan formerly, thus preventing the ripening of the seeds, I notice\nthat the Agricultural ant is placing its cities along the turn-rows in\nthe fields, walks in gardens, inside about the gates, &c., where they\ncan cultivate their farms without molestation from the cattle.\n\n\"There can be no doubt of the fact, that the particular species of\ngrain-bearing grass mentioned above is intentionally planted. In\nfarmer-like manner the ground upon which it stands is carefully\ndivested of all other grasses and weeds during the time it is growing.\nWhen it is ripe the grain is taken care of, the dry stubble cut away\nand carried off, the paved area being left unencumbered until the\nensuing autumn, when the same 'ant-rice' reappears within the same\ncircle, and receives the same agricultural attention as was bestowed\nupon the previous crop; and so on year after year, as I _know_ to be\nthe case, in all situations where the ants' settlements are protected\nfrom graminivorous animals.\"\n\nIn a second letter, Dr. Lincecum, in reply to an inquiry from Mr.\nDarwin, whether he supposed that the Ants plant seeds for the ensuing\ncrop, says, \"I have not the slightest doubt of it. And my conclusions\nhave not been arrived at from hasty or careless observation, nor from\nseeing the ants do something that looked a little like it, and then\nguessing at the results. I have at all seasons watched the same\nant-cities during the last twelve years, and I know that what I stated\nin my former letter is true. I visited the same cities yesterday, and\nfound the crop of ant-rice growing finely, and exhibiting also the\nsigns of high cultivation, and not a blade of any other kind of grass\nor weed was to be seen within twelve inches of the circular row of\nant-rice.\"\n\nThe economical habits of this wonderful insect far surpass anything\nthat Solomon has written of the Ant, and it is not too much to say\nthat if any of the Scriptural writers had ventured to speak of an Ant\nthat not only laid up stores of grain, but actually prepared the soil\nfor the crop, planted the seed, kept the ground free from weeds, and\nfinally reaped the harvest, the statement would have been utterly\ndisbelieved, and the credibility not only of that particular writer\nbut of the rest of Scripture severely endangered. We all know that\nSolomon's statement concerning the Ant has afforded one of the stock\narguments against the truth of Scripture; and here we have his\nstatements not only corroborated to the very letter by those who have\nvisited Palestine for the express purpose of investigating its\nzoology, but far surpassed by the observations of a scientific man who\nhad watched the insects for a series of years. One of the Ants of\nPalestine, shown on page 621, belongs to the same genus as the\nAgricultural Ant.\n\nAs may be inferred from the above description, the habits of Ants vary\ngreatly according to their species and the climate in which they live.\nAll, however, are wonderful creatures; and whether we look at their\nvaried architecture, their mode of procuring food, the system of\nslave-catching adopted by some, the \"milking\" of aphides practised by\nothers, their astonishing mode of communicating thought to each other,\nand their perfect system of discipline, we feel how true were the\nwords of the royal naturalist, that the Ants are \"little upon earth,\nbut are exceeding wise.\"\n\n [Illustration: ANT OF PALESTINE (Atta barbara).\n\n \"_Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be\n wise._\"--PROV. vi. 6.]\n\nThere is one point of their economy in which all known species agree.\nOnly those which are destined to become perfectly developed males and\nfemales attain the winged state. Before they assume the transitional\nor pupal condition, each spins around itself a slight but tough silken\ncocoon, in which it lies secure during the time which is consumed in\ndeveloping its full perfection of form.\n\nWhen it is ready to emerge, the labourer Ants aid in freeing it from\nthe cocoon, and in a short time it is ready to fly. Millions of these\nwinged ants rise into the air, seeking their mates, and, as they are\nnot strong on the wing, and are liable to be tossed about by every\ngust of wind, vast numbers of them perish. Whole armies of them fall\ninto the water and are drowned or devoured by fish, while the\ninsectivorous birds hold great festival on so abundant a supply of\nfood. As soon as they are mated they bend their wings forward, snap\nthem off, and pass the rest of their lives on the ground.\n\nIn consequence of the destruction that takes place among the winged\nAnts, the Arabs have a proverb which is applied to those who are\nover-ambitious: \"If God purposes the destruction of an ant, He permits\nwings to grow upon her.\"\n\n\n\n\nHOMOPTERA.\n\nTHE CRIMSON WORM.\n\n The scarlet or crimson of Scripture--Signification of the word\n _Tol\u00e2\u00e2th_--The Coccus or Cochineal of Palestine compared with\n that of Mexico--Difference between the sexes--Mode of preparing\n the insect--The Arabic word _Kermes_.\n\n\nWe now come to another order of insects.\n\nJust as the purple dye was obtained from a mollusc, the scarcely less\nvaluable crimson or scarlet was obtained from an insect. The Hebrew\nword _tol\u00e2\u00e2th_ is translated in the Authorized Version either as\n\"crimson\" or \"scarlet,\" but its full signification is the\nCrimson-worm. This is an insect scientifically named _Coccus ilicis_\non account of its food. It is closely allied to the well-known\ncochineal of Mexico, which gives a more brilliant dye, and has at the\npresent day nearly superseded the native insect. It is, however,\nstill employed as a dye in some parts of the country.\n\nAs its name imports, it feeds on the holm oak (_Quercus coccifera_), a\ntree which is very plentiful in Palestine, and attains a large size.\n\n [Illustration: THE CRIMSON WORM.\n\n \"_Though your sins be as red as crimson, they shall be white as\n snow._\"--ISA i. 13.]\n\nLike the cochineal insect of Mexico, the female is very much larger\nthan her mate, and it is only from her that the dye is procured. At\nthe proper season of year the females are gathered off the trees and\ncarefully dried, the mode of drying having some effect upon the\nquality of the dye. During the process of drying the insect alters\ngreatly, both in colour and size, shrinking to less than half its\noriginal dimensions, and assuming a greyish brown hue instead of a\ndeep red. When placed in water it soon gives out its colouring matter,\nand communicates to the water the rich colour with which we are\nfamiliar under the name of carmine, or crimson. This latter name, by\nthe way, is only a corruption of the Arabic _kermes_, which is the\nname of the insect.\n\nThe reader will remember that this was one of the three sacred\ncolours--scarlet, purple, and blue--used in the vestments of the\npriests and the hangings of the tabernacle, the white not taking rank\nas a colour.\n\nThe Coccus belongs to the Homoptera in common with the cicad\u00e6, the\nlantern flies, the hoppers, and the aphides.\n\nOn page 623 the large females are shown on the prickly pear, and near\nthem are the tiny males, some flying and some on the leaves.\n\n\n\n\nLEPIDOPTERA.\n\nTHE CLOTHES MOTH.\n\n The Moth of Scripture evidently the Clothes Moth--The S\u00e2s and\n the 'Ash--Similitude between the Hebrew _s\u00e2s_ and the Greek\n _s\u00eas_--Moths and garments--Accumulation of clothes in the\n East--Various uses of the hoarded robes--The Moths, the rust,\n and the thief.\n\n\nOnly one Lepidopterous insect is mentioned by name in the Scriptures.\nThis is the MOTH, by which we must always understand some species of\nClothes Moth--in fact, one of the Tineid\u00e6, which are as plentiful and\ndestructive in Palestine as in this country.\n\nTwo words are used in the Old Testament to express the Moth, one of\nwhich, _s\u00e2s_, only occurs once, and then in connexion with the other\nword _'ash_. The resemblance of the Hebrew _s\u00e2s_ and the Greek _s\u00eas_\nis to be noted, both of them denominating the same insect. See Is. li.\n8: \"For the moth (_'ash_) shall eat them up like garment, and the worm\n(_s\u00e2s_) shall eat them like wool.\" Buxtorf translates _s\u00e2s_ as _tinea,\nblatta_.\n\nSeveral references are made to the Moth in the Scriptures, and nearly\nall have reference to its destructive habits. The solitary exceptions\noccur in the Book of Job, \"Behold, He put no trust in His servants;\nand His angels He charged with folly: how much less in them that dwell\nin houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are crushed\nbefore the moth?\" (Ch. iv. 18, 19.) A similar allusion to the Moth is\nmade in the same book: \"He buildeth his house as a moth, and as a\nbooth that the keeper maketh\" (xxvii. 18).\n\nThe Moth is mentioned in one of the penitential passages of the\nPsalms: \"When Thou with rebukes dost correct man for iniquity, Thou\nmakest his beauty to consume away like a moth: surely every man is\nvanity\" (Ps. xxxix. 11).\n\nThe prophets also make use of the same image. \"Behold, the Lord God\nwill help me; who is he that shall condemn me? lo, they all shall wax\nold as a garment; the moth shall eat them\" (Isa. l. 9). The image is\nrepeated in the next chapter (ver. 8), in which the 'Ash and the S\u00e2s\nare both mentioned. Hosea employs the word as a metaphor expressive of\ngradual destruction: \"Therefore will I be unto Ephraim as a moth, and\nto the house of Judah as rottenness\" (v. 12).\n\nIn the New Testament reference is made several times to the Moth. \"Lay\nnot up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth\ncorrupt, and where thieves break through and steal\" (Matt. vi. 19).\nSt. James, in a kind of commentary on this passage, writes as follows:\n\"Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall\ncome upon you.\n\n\"Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten.\n\n\"Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a\nwitness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have\nheaped treasures together for the last days.\" (v. 1-3.)\n\nEven to ourselves these passages are significant enough, but to the\nJews and the inhabitants of Palestine they possessed a force which we\ncan hardly realize in this country. In the East large stores of\nclothing are kept by the wealthy, not only for their own use, but as\npresents to others. At a marriage feast, for example, the host\npresents each of the guests with a wedding garment. Clothes are also\ngiven as marks of favour, and a present of \"changes of raiment,\"\n_i.e._ suits of clothing, is one of the most common gifts. As at the\npresent day, there was anciently no greater mark of favour than for\nthe giver to present the very robe which he was wearing, and when that\nrobe happened to be an official one, the gift included the rank which\nit symbolized. Thus Joseph was invested with royal robes, as well as\nwith the royal ring (Gen. xli. 42). Mordecai was clothed in the\nking's robes: \"Let the royal apparel be brought which the king useth\nto wear, and the horse the king rideth upon, and the crown royal which\nis set upon his head.\n\n\"And let this apparel and horse be delivered to the hand of one of the\nking's most noble princes, that they may array the man withal whom the\nking delighteth to honour, and bring him on horseback through the\nstreet of the city, and proclaim before him, Thus shall it be done to\nthe man whom the king delighteth to honour.\" (Esther vi. 8, 9.)\n\nThe loose clothing of the East requires no fitting, as is the case\nwith the tight garments of the West; any garment fits any man: so that\nthe powerful and wealthy could lay up great stores of clothing,\nknowing that they would fit any person to whom they were given. An\nallusion to this practice of keeping great stores of clothing is made\nin Job xxvii. 26: \"Though he heap up silver as the dust, and prepare\nraiment as the clay;\n\n\"He may prepare it, but the just shall put it on, and the innocent\nshall divide the silver.\"\n\nSo large was the supply of clothing in a wealthy man's house, that\nspecial chambers were set apart for it, and a special officer, called\nthe \"keeper of the garments\" (2 Chron. xxxiv. 22), was appointed to\ntake charge of them.\n\nThus, when a man was said to have clothing, the expression was a\nsynonym for wealth and power. See Isa. iii. 6: \"When a man shall take\nhold of his brother of the house of his father, saying, Thou hast\nclothing, be thou our ruler.\"\n\nThe reader will now see how forcible was the image of the Moth and the\ngarments, that is used so freely in the Scriptures. The Moth would not\nmeddle with garments actually in use, so that a poor man would not\nbe troubled with it. Only those who were rich enough to keep stores\nof clothing in their houses need fear the Moth, which would be\nas destructive to that portion of their wealth represented by\ntheir clothes as the \"rust,\"--_i.e._ the Grain Moth (_Tinea\ngranella_)--which consumed their stores, or the thief who came by\nnight and stole their gold and silver.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SILKWORM MOTH.\n\n Various passages wherein Silk is mentioned--The virtuous woman\n and her household--Probability that the Hebrews were acquainted\n with Silk--Present cultivation of the Silkworm--The Silk-farms\n of the Lebanon--Signification of the word _Meshi_--Silkworms and\n thunder--Luis of Grenada's sermon--The Hebrew word _G\u00e2zam_, and\n its signification--The Palmer-worm of Scripture.\n\n\nIn the Authorized Version there are several passages wherein silk is\nmentioned, but it is rather doubtful whether the translation be\ncorrect or not, except in one passage of the Revelation: \"And the\nmerchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man\nbuyeth their merchandise any more:\n\n\"The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of\npearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk.\" (xviii. 11, 12.)\n\nIn Prov. xxxi. 22 Solomon writes of the virtuous woman \"that she\nmaketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and\npurple.\" The word which is here given as \"silk\" is translated in the\nJewish Bible as \"fine linen.\"\n\nIn the other two passages, however, in which the word occurs it is\nrendered as \"silk:\" \"I clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod\nthee with badger's skin, and I girded thee about with fine linen, and\nI covered thee with silk\" (Ezek. xvi. 10). See also verse 13 of the\nsame chapter: \"Thus wast thou decked with gold and silver, and thy\nraiment was of fine linen and broidered work.\"\n\nThat the Hebrews were acquainted with silk from very early times is\nnearly certain, but it is probable that until comparatively late years\nthey only knew the manufactured material, and were ignorant of the\nsource whence it was derived. As to the date at which silk was\nintroduced into Palestine, nothing certain is known; but it is most\nlikely that Solomon's fleets brought silk from India, together with\nthe other valuables which are mentioned in the history of that\nmonarch.\n\nAt the present day silk is largely cultivated, and the silk-farmers of\nthe Lebanon are noted for the abundance of the crop which is annually\nproduced. The greatest care is taken in rearing the worms. An\nexcellent account of these farms is given by Mr. G. W. Chasseaud in\nhis \"Druses of the Lebanon:\"--\n\n\"Proceeding onward, and protected from the fierce heat of the sun's\nrays by the pleasant shade of mountain pines, we were continually\nencountering horseloads of cocoons, the fruit of the industry of the\nDruse silk-rearer. The whole process, from hatching the silkworms'\neggs till the moment that the worm becomes a cocoon, is one series of\nanxiety and labour to the peasant. The worms are so delicate that the\nsmallest change of temperature exposes them to destruction, and the\npeasant can never confidently count upon reaping a harvest until the\ncocoon is fairly set.\"\n\nAfter a long and interesting description of the multiplied and\nceaseless labours of the silk-grower in providing food for the armies\nof caterpillars and sheltering them from the elements, the writer\nproceeds as follows:--\n\n\"The peasant is unwilling to permit of our remaining and watching\noperations. Traditional superstition has inculcated in him a dread of\nthe evil eye. If we stop and admire the wisdom displayed by the worm,\nit will, in his opinion, be productive of evil results; either the\ncocoon will be badly formed, or the silk will be worthless. So, first\nclearing the place of all intruders, he puts a huge padlock on the\ndoor, and, locking the _khlook_ (room in which the silkworms are\nkept), deposits the key in his _zinnar_, or waistband.\n\n\"Next week he will come and take out the cocoons, and, separating them\nfrom the briars, choose out a sufficiency for breeding purposes, and\nall the rest are handed over to the women of his family. These first\nof all disentangle the cocoon from the rich and fibrous web with which\nit is enveloped, and which constitutes an article of trade by itself.\nThe cocoons are then either reeled off by the peasant himself or else\nsold to some of the silk factories of the neighbourhood, where they\nare immediately reeled off, or are suffocated in an oven, and\nafterwards, being well aired and dried, piled up in the magazines of\nthe factory.\n\n\"Such is a brief account or history of these cocoons, of which we were\ncontinually encountering horseload after horseload.\n\n\"As you will perceive, unless suffering from a severe cold in the\nhead, the odour arising from these cocoons is not the most agreeable;\nbut this arises partly from the neglect and want of care of the\npeasants themselves, who, reeling off basketful after basketful of\ncocoons, suffer the dead insects within to be thrown about and\naccumulate round the house, where they putrefy and emit noxious\nvapours.\"\n\nThe Hebrew word _meshi_, which is the one that occurs in Ezek. xvi.,\nis derived from a root which signifies \"to draw out,\" probably in\nallusion to the delicacy of the fibre.\n\nAlthough our limits will not permit the cultivation of the Silkworm to\nbe described more fully, it may here be added that all silk-growers\nare full of superstition regarding the welfare of the caterpillars,\nand imagine that they are so sensitive that they will die of fear. The\nnoise of a thunderclap is, in their estimation, fatal to Silkworms;\nand the breeders were therefore accustomed to beat drums within the\nhearing of the Silkworms, increasing the loudness of the sound, and\nimitating as nearly as possible the crash and roll of thunder, so that\nthe caterpillars might be familiar with the sound if the thunderstorm\nshould happen to break near them.\n\nA quaint use of this superstition is made by Luis of Grenada in one of\nhis discourses:--\n\n_Dominica IV. post Pent., Concio 1._\n\n\"Sunt rursus alii, quorum pectora sic generis humani hostis obsedit,\nut nullius divin\u00e6 vocis fulminibus perterreantur, vel parum animo\ncommoveantur.\n\n\"Qu\u00e2 autem ratione eorundem aures obstruat, proposito hoc exemplo\nindicabo.\n\n\"Bombyces, hoc est vermes illi qui serica f\u00ecla nectunt, ita tonitruum\nsonitu gravantur, ut interduin moriantur. Quo fit, ut qui eos nutriunt\ntympana frequenter pulsent, ut sonitui molliori assueti a graviori\ntonitrui sono non l\u00e6dantur. Tales mihi multi sacrarum concionum\nauditores h\u00e2c \u00e6tate esse videntur, qui quotidianis concionibus\naudiendis sine ullo animi motu assueti, si quis concionator, a Deo\nactus, gravius aliquid et formidibilius intonet, non idem magis animo\npermoveantur; utpote qui negligenter audiendi consuetudine pene\ninsensibiles ad verbi Dei tonitrua affecti sint.\"\n\n\n_Fourth Sunday after Pentecost, Sermon 1._\n\n\"Again, others there are of whose breasts the enemy of mankind hath\ntaken such possession, that they be terrified by the thunderbolts of\nno Divine voice, or are in mind only a little disturbed thereby.\n\n\"Now after what sort he stoppeth the ears of these same men I will, by\nthis example, propound and set forth.\n\n\"The Bombyxes--that is to say, those worms which do spin the silk\nthreads--are by peals of thunder so troubled that sometimes they die.\nWherefore it comes to pass that the keepers of them do ofttimes beat\ndrums, to the end that, being used to the softer noise, they may take\nno hurt from that sound of the thunder which is heavier. Of such a\nsort do seem to me to be nowadays many hearers of sacred discourses.\nFor inasmuch as they be used to the hearing of common discourses, by\nwhich their minds are nothing moved, if a preacher, urged of God, do\nsound forth something in any wise solemn and dreadful, they are not,\ntherefore, any the more moved in mind, seeing that by their custom of\ncareless hearing they have grown well-nigh hardened to the thunders of\nGod's Word.\"\n\n\nAbout the correct reading of the Hebrew word _g\u00e2zam_, which is\ntranslated in the Authorized Version \"palmer-worm,\" there has always\nbeen some difficulty. It only occurs in three passages of Scripture,\nand in each case reference is made to its destructive powers.\n\nThe first is in Joel i. 4: \"That which the palmer-worm hath left, hath\nthe locust eaten.\"\n\nThe second is in chap. ii. 25 of the same book: \"I will restore to you\nthe years that the locust hath eaten, the canker-worm, and the\ncaterpillar, and the palmer-worm, my great army which I sent among\nyou.\"\n\nThe third is in Amos iv. 9: \"I have smitten you with blasting and\nmildew: when your gardens, and your vineyards, and your fig-trees, and\nyour olive-trees increased, the palmer-worm devoured them: yet have\nye not returned unto me, saith the Lord.\"\n\n [Illustration: BUTTERFLIES OF PALESTINE.\n\n SYRIAN GRAYLING (Hipparchia Persephone). SYRIAN ORANGE-TIP (Antocharis\n Glauce).\n\n SYRIAN SWALLOW-TAIL (Papilio Virgatus).\n\n \"_That which the palmer-worm hath left hath the locust eaten._\"--JOEL\n i. 4.]\n\n\nThe Jewish Bible retains the reading of palmer-worm, but affixes the\nmark of doubt, as it does to the canker-worm. Some Hebraists have\nthought that the word _g\u00e2zam_ is one of the names to designate the\nlocust, either some distinct species, or the same species in its\nundeveloped condition. Others have thought that, as the Jews were very\nloose in their nomenclature, they would not have made so great an\nexception in favour of an insect as to apply two different names to\nit.\n\nBuxtorf derives the word from a root signifying \"to shave,\" or \"to\nshear,\" in allusion to the havoc which the _g\u00e2zam_ makes among the\nvegetation. The reader will see that it is impossible to decide with\nany certainty upon the precise species of insect signified by the word\n_g\u00e2zam_; but there can be no harm in following the translation of the\nSeptuagint and Vulgate, both of which render it as \"caterpillar.\"\nAssuming, therefore, that it is a caterpillar of some kind, I have\ninserted figures of some butterflies found in Palestine, together with\nthe caterpillar and chrysalis of one of them, namely the Papilio.\n\n\n\n\nDIPTERA.\n\nFLIES.\n\n Flies of Scripture--Dead Flies and the apothecary's\n ointment--Gadflies and their attacks--Annoyance caused by the\n House-fly--Flies and ophthalmia--Signor Pierotti's account of\n the Flies--The sovereign remedy against Flies--Causes of their\n prevalence.\n\n\nNext we come to the Dipterous or two-winged insects, which are very\nsparingly mentioned in the Scriptures, and only one species is\ndefinitely named.\n\nThere are two Hebrew words which are translated as \"fly.\" One is\n_zebub_, so familiar in the compound word _Baal-zebub_--_i.e._ \"Lord\nof Flies.\" This word only occurs in two passages, one being the\nwell-known proverb, \"Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary\nto send forth a stinking savour\" (Eccles. x. 1).\n\nThis passage requires a little explanation. By the word \"apothecary\"\nwe must not understand a medical man, nor by the word \"ointment\" the\nmollifying substance used as an application for wounds. The ointment\nof Scripture signifies the various perfumed unguents used as scents\nand cosmetics for the living, as part of the preparation of the dead\nfor the grave, and as an essential accessory to Jewish ritual.\n\nThese ointments were most carefully made, and the person who prepared\nand sold them was called the apothecary. If, therefore, the unguents\nwere carelessly stored, and the Flies permitted to enter, the perfume\nwould be destroyed by the odour of their dead bodies.\n\nThe second passage is Isa. vii. 18: \"The Lord shall hiss for the fly\nthat is in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt.\" No particular\nspecies of fly is here indicated; but it is evident that some\npeculiarly irritating and troublesome, not to say dangerous, insect is\nsignified.\n\nMany species of gadfly would produce that effect, and inflict direful\ntorments on those whom they assail. Even in England the gadflies are\nmore than troublesome to human beings. In the New Forest I have been\nfairly driven back by the attack of the gadflies, which wounded me\nthrough a thick woollen coat, while they attacked the uncovered\nportions of the skin so fiercely that, before reaching shelter, my\nneck was bathed in blood.\n\nAnother word is _ar\u00f4b_, which is applied to the flies which were\nbrought upon Egypt in the great plague. It is probable that some\ndifferent species is here signified, but there is no certainty in the\nmatter. Any species, however, would be a sufficient plague if they\nexceeded the usual number which infest Egypt, and which at first make\nthe life of a foreigner a burden to him. They swarm in such myriads,\nthat he eats flies, drinks flies, and breathes flies.\n\nNot the least part of the nuisance is, that they cluster in the eyes\nof those who are affected with the prevalent ophthalmia, which is so\nfertile a cause of blindness, and so convey the infection with them. A\nstranger is always struck with the appearance of the children, who\nhave quantities of these pests upon and about their eyes, and yet seem\nperfectly unaffected by a visitation which would wellnigh drive a\nEuropean mad.\n\nSignor Pierotti writes feelingly on the subject:--\n\n\"These insects sometimes cause no slight suffering in Palestine, as I\ncan vouch from my own experience. However large or however small they\nmay be, a rabid and restless foe, they attack alike, and make\nthemselves insufferable in a thousand ways, in every season and place,\nin the house and in the field, by day and by night.\n\n\"Frequently in 1857 and 1860, while I was encamped near the tents of\nthe Bedaw\u00een, in the neighbourhood of the Jordan, and to the south of\nHebron, flies were brought in such numbers by the east wind that all,\nbeasts and men, were in danger of being choked by them, as they crept\ninto our ears, noses, and mouths, and all over our bodies. My servant\nand I were the first to fly from the pest, as we were spotted all over\nlike lepers with the eruption caused by their bites: the Bedaw\u00een\nthemselves were not slow to follow our example.\n\n\"I am not the only person who has experienced this nuisance, for\nEugene Roger, who travelled in Palestine during the seventeenth\ncentury, informs us that during his stay at Nazareth a swarm of small\nblack flies, called _bargash_, invaded the plain of Esdraelon, where a\ntribe of Bedaw\u00een, to the number of six hundred tents, were encamped,\nwho suffered greatly from them.\n\n\"The flies, therefore, still infest Palestine as they did of old,\nexcept that they are not now so numerous as to compel the chiefs of\nthe villages or tribes (answering to the kings of the Pentateuch and\nJoshua) to evacuate the country before them.\n\n\"The Philistines had a special deity whom they invoked against these\npests, Baalzebub, the God of Flies, whose temple was at Ekron. The\nreason of this is evident at the present day, for the ancient country\nof the Philistines is infested with insect plagues, as I experienced\ntogether with his Excellency Surraya Pasha in the summer of 1859.\n\n\"As, however, we had no faith in Baalzebub, we were obliged to arm\nourselves with fly-traps and stoical patience. Many travellers bring\nwith them a perfect druggist's shop from Europe as a protection\nagainst these nuisances, and leave behind them this only efficacious\nremedy, patience. This I strongly recommend; it is very portable, very\ncheap, and equally useful in all climates.\n\n\"It is especially valuable in the case of the insects, as they are\nfound everywhere in greater or less numbers; especially in the\ndwellings, where they are nourished by the carrion that lies about,\nthe heaps of rubbish, the filth of the streets, the leakage of\ncesspools and sewers, the dirt in the houses, the filthy clothing worn\nby the people, and the kind of food they eat. Though the country of\nBaalzebub is deserted and enslaved, the flies are still abundant and\nfree, self-invited guests at the table, unasked assistants in the\nkitchen, tasting everything, immolating themselves in their\ngastronomic ardour, and forming an undesired seasoning in every dish.\"\n\n\n\n\n\nGNATS.\n\n The Gnat of Scripture--Straining out the Gnat and swallowing the\n camel, a typographical error--Probable identity of the Gnat and\n the mosquito.\n\n\nIt has already been stated that only one species of fly is mentioned\nby name in the Scriptures. This is the Gnat, the name of which occurs\nin the familiar passage, \"Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat and\nswallow a camel\" (Matt. xxiii. 24).\n\n [Illustration: NOXIOUS FLIES OF PALESTINE.\n\n MOSQUITO (Culex). CAMEL FLY (Tabanus marocanus).\n\n \"_He sent divers sorts of flies among them which devoured them._\"--PSA\n xxviii. 45.]\n\nI may again mention here that the words \"strain at\" ought to have been\nprinted \"strain out,\" the substitution of the one for the other being\nonly a typographical error. The allusion is made to a custom which is\nexplained by reference to the preceding article on the fly. In order\nto avoid taking flies and other insects into the mouth while drinking,\na piece of thin linen stuff was placed over the cup, so that if any\ninsects, as was usually the case, had got into the liquid, they would\nbe \"strained out\" by the linen.\n\nWhether or not any particular species of insect was signified by the\nword \"gnat\" is very doubtful, and in all probability the word is only\nused to express the contrast between the smallest known insects and\nthe largest known beasts. Gnats, especially those species which are\npopularly known by the word \"mosquito,\" are very plentiful in many\nparts of Palestine, especially those which are near water, and are as\nannoying there as in other lands which they inhabit.\n\n\n\n\nAPTERA AND APANIPTERA.\n\nTHE LOUSE.\n\n Insect parasites--The plague of Lice--Its effect on the\n magicians or priests--The Hebrew word _Chinnim_--Probability\n that it may be represented by \"tick\"--Habits of the ticks, their\n dwellings in dust, and their effects on man and beast.\n\n\nWe close the history of insects mentioned in Scripture with two\nparasites of a singularly disagreeable character.\n\nWith respect to the former of them, we find it mentioned in the\naccount of the great plagues of Egypt. After the two plagues of the\nwaters and the frogs, both of which were imitated by the magicians,\n_i.e._ the priests, a third was brought upon Egypt, which affected the\nmagicians even more than the people, for a reason which we shall\npresently see:--\n\n\"And the Lord said unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch out thy rod,\nand smite the dust of the land, that it may become lice, throughout\nall the land of Egypt.\n\n\"And they did so; for Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod, and\nsmote the dust of the earth, and it became lice in man and in beast;\nall the dust of the land became lice throughout all the land of Egypt.\n\n\"And the magicians did so with their enchantments to bring forth lice,\nbut they could not: so there were lice upon man and upon beast.\"\n\nNow it is hardly possible to conceive a calamity which would have told\nwith greater effect upon the magicians, by whose advice Pharoah had\nresisted the requests of Moses and Aaron.\n\nLiving in a land where all, from the highest to the lowest, were\ninfested with parasites, the priests were so much in advance of the\nlaity that they were held polluted if they harboured one single\nnoxious insect upon their persons, or in their clothing. The clothing,\nbeing linen, could be kept clean by frequent washing, while the\npossibility of the body being infested by parasites was prevented by\nthe custom of shaving the whole of the body, from the crown of the\nhead to the sole of the foot, at least once in every three days.\n\nIt may easily be imagined, therefore, how terrible this visitation\nmust have been to such men. As swine to the Pharisee, as the flesh of\ncattle to the Brahmin, so was the touch of a parasite to the Egyptian\npriest. He was degraded in his own estimation and in that of his\nfellows. He could perform no sacred offices: so that, in fact, all the\nidolatrous worship of Egypt ceased until this particular plague had\nbeen withdrawn.\n\nWe now come to a consideration of the insect which is signified by the\nHebrew word _chinnim_. Sir Samuel Baker is of opinion that the word\nought to have been translated as \"ticks,\" and for the following\nreasons:--\n\nAfter quoting the passage which relates to the stretching of Aaron's\nrod over the dust, and the consequence of that action, he proceeds as\nfollows: \"Now the louse that infests the human body and hair has no\nconnexion whatever with dust, and, if subjected to a few hours'\nexposure to the dry heat of the burning sand, it would shrivel and\ndie. But a tick is an inhabitant of the dust, a dry horny insect,\nwithout any apparent moisture in its composition. It lives in hot sand\nand dust, where it cannot possibly obtain nourishment until some\nwretched animal should lie down upon the spot, and become covered with\nthese horrible vermin.\n\n\"I have frequently seen dry desert places so infested with ticks that\nthe ground was perfectly alive with them, and it would have been\nimpossible to have rested upon the earth. In such spots, the passage\nin Exodus has frequently seemed to me as bearing reference to these\nvermin, which are the greatest enemy to man and beast. It is well\nknown that from the size of a grain of sand, in their natural state,\nthey will distend to the size of a hazel nut after having preyed for\nsome days on the body of an animal.\" (\"Nile Tributaries,\" p. 122.)\n\nGranting that this suggestion be the correct one, as it certainly is\nthe most consistent both with actual facts and with the words of Holy\nWrit, the plague would lose none of its intensity, but would, if\nanything, be more horrible. Only those who have suffered from them can\nappreciate the miseries caused by the attack of these ticks, which\ncling so tightly that they can scarcely be removed without being torn\nin pieces, and without leaving some portion of their head beneath the\nskin of their victim. Man and beast suffer equally from them, as is\nimplied in the words of Scripture, and, unless they are very\ncautiously removed, painful and obstinate is the result of their\nbites.\n\n\n\n\nTHE FLEA.\n\n Prevalence of the Flea in the East, and the annoyance caused by\n them to travellers--Fleas of the Lebanon--The Bey's\n bedfellows--The Pasha at the bath--Use of the word in Scripture.\n\n\nThis active little pest absolutely swarms in the East. The inhabitants\nare so used to the Fleas that either the insects do not touch them, or\nby long custom they become so inured to their attack that the bites\nare not felt.\n\nBut every traveller in Eastern lands has a tale to tell about the\nFleas, which seem to be accepted as one of the institutions of the\ncountry, and to be contemplated with perfect equanimity. Miss Rogers,\nfor example, in her \"Domestic Life in Palestine,\" mentions how she was\nobliged to stand upon a box in order to be out of the reach of a\nlarge company of Fleas that were hopping about on the floor!\n\nMr. Urquhart, experienced Orientalist as he was, found on one occasion\nthat the Fleas were too strong for him. He had forgotten his curtain,\nand was invaded by armies of Fleas, that marched steadily up the bed\nand took possession of their prey. The people were quite amused at his\ncomplaints, and said that their Bey could not sleep without a couple\nof hundred of them in his bosom. Mr. Urquhart suggests that these\nlittle creatures act as a wholesome irritant to the skin, and says\nthat the last two mouthfuls of every meal are for the benefit of the\nFleas.\n\nIn order to show the perfect indifference with which the presence of\nthese little pests is regarded, I quote a passage from Mr. Farley's\n\"Druses of the Lebanon.\" He was in a Turkish bath, and was much amused\nat a scene which presented itself.\n\n\"A man, whose skin resembled old discoloured vellum, was occupying\nhimself with the somewhat undignified pursuit of pursuing with great\neagerness something that, from the movement of his hands, seemed\ncontinually to elude him, jumping about and taking refuge in the\ncreases and folds of his shirt, that was spread out over his lap as he\nsat cross-legged on his bedstead like a tailor on his board. This\noddity was no less a dignitary than a Pasha.\"\n\nThis extract also serves to illustrate the two passages in Scripture\nwherein the word \"flea\" is mentioned, and in both of which it is used\nas a metaphor to express weakness on the one side and power on the\nother.\n\nThe first occurs in 1 Sam. xxiv. 14:--\"After whom is the king of\nIsrael come out? After whom dost thou pursue? After a dead dog, after\na flea?\" The second is in chap. xxvi. of the same book, ver. 20: \"Now\ntherefore ... the king of Israel is come out to seek a flea, as when\none doth hunt a partridge in the mountains.\" The reader will see how\ncompletely the anecdote of the Pasha in the bath illustrates this\npassage.\n\n\n\n\nARACHNIDA.\n\nTHE SCORPION.\n\n The Scorpions of Palestine--Signification of the word\n _Akrabbim_--Habits of the Scorpion--Dangers of mud walls--Venom\n of the Scorpion--Scorpions at sea--The Scorpion whip, and its\n use--The Scorpion Pass.\n\n\nThe Arachnida are represented in Scripture by the Scorpion and Spider.\n\nScorpions are exceedingly common in Palestine, and to a novice are a\nconstant source of terror until he learns to be accustomed to them.\nThe appearance of the Scorpion is too well known to need description,\nevery one being aware that it is in reality a kind of spider that has\nthe venom claw at the end of its body, and not in its jaw. As to the\nrendering of the word _akrabbim_ as \"Scorpions,\" there has never been\nany doubt.\n\nThese unpleasant creatures always manage to insinuate themselves in\nsome crevice, and an experienced traveller is cautious where the\nScorpions are plentiful, and will never seat himself in the country\nuntil he has ascertained that no Scorpions are beneath the stones on\nor near which he is sitting. Holes in walls are favourite places of\nrefuge for the Scorpion, and are very plentiful, the mud walls always\ntumbling down in parts, and affording homes for Scorpions, spiders,\nsnakes, and other visitors.\n\nThe venom of the Scorpion varies much in potency according to the\nspecies and size of the creature, some of the larger Scorpions being\nable to render a man ill for a considerable time, and even to kill him\nif he should be a sensitive subject. So much feared were the Scorpions\nthat one of the chief privileges of the Apostles and their immediate\nfollowers was their immunity from the stings of Scorpions and the bite\nof venomous serpents.\n\nIt is said, however, that after a person has been stung once by a\nScorpion, he suffers comparatively little the second time, and that if\nhe be stung three or four times, the only pain that he suffers arises\nfrom the puncture. Sailors also say that after a week at sea the\npoison of the Scorpion loses its power, and that they care nothing for\nthe Scorpions which are sure to come on board inside the bundles of\nfirewood.\n\n [Illustration: THE SCORPION.\n\n \"_And they had tails like unto scorpions: and there were stings in\n their tails._\"--REV. ix. 10.]\n\nWe will now take a few of the Scriptural passages which allude to the\nScorpion. As may be expected, most of them refer to the poisonous\nquality of its sting, though one or two allude to its habit of\ndwelling in desert places. See, for example, Deut. viii. 15, which\nforms part of the address that Moses delivered to the Israelites:\n\"Lest ... thou forget the Lord thy God, which brought thee forth out\nof the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage;\n\n\"Who led thee through that great and terrible wilderness, wherein were\nfiery serpents, and scorpions, and drought, where there was no water.\"\n\nA similar image of desolation is found in Ezek. ii. 6: \"And thou, son\nof man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words,\nthough briars and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among\nscorpions.\"\n\nThose passages which mention the venom of the Scorpion are numerous,\nthough most, if not all, of them occur in the New Testament. See Rev.\nix. 5: \"And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but\nthat they should be tormented five months, and their torment was as\nthe torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.\" Also ver. 10 of\nthe same chapter: \"And they had tails like unto scorpions: and there\nwere stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five\nmonths.\"\n\nThe venom of the Scorpion is indirectly mentioned in other passages.\nThere is, for example, the well-known saying of our Lord, \"If a son\nshall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?\" (Luke xi. 12.) And in\nthe preceding chapter of the same Evangelist Scorpions are classed\nwith serpents in their power of injury: \"Behold, I give unto you power\nto tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the\nenemy; and nothing shall by any means hurt you.\"\n\n\nThere is another reference to the Scorpion in the Old Testament, which\nrequires an explanation. It forms part of the rash counsel given to\nRehoboam by his friends: \"My father made your yoke heavy, and I will\nadd to your yoke; my father also chastised you with whips, but I will\nchastise you with scorpions.\"\n\nThe general tenor of this passage is evident enough, namely, that he\nintended to be far more severe than his father had been. But his words\nassume a new force when we remember that there was a kind of whip\ncalled a Scorpion. This terrible instrument was made for the express\npurpose of punishing slaves, so that the mere mention of it was an\ninsult. It consisted of several thongs, each of which was loaded with\nknobs of metal, and tipped with a metal hook, so that it resembled the\njointed and hooked tail of the Scorpion. This dreadful instrument of\ntorture could kill a man by a few blows, and it was even used in\ncombats in the amphitheatre, a gladiator armed with a Scorpion being\nmatched against one armed with a spear.\n\nThe prevalence of the Scorpion in Palestine and its neighbourhood may\nbe inferred from the fact that a wady or pass between the south end of\nthe Dead Sea and Zion was named after it. The southern boundary of\nJudah is said to be at Maaleh Akrabbim (Josh. xv. 3). Now the literal\ntranslation of these words is \"The Ascent of Scorpions,\" or The\nScorpion Pass.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SPIDER.\n\n Signification of the word _Semamith_--Various interpretations of\n a Scriptural passage--Talmudical opinions respecting the\n creature--The 'Akkabish and its web--Spiders of Palestine.\n\n\nAlthough the word \"spider\" is mentioned three times in the Authorized\nVersion of the Bible, one of them must be excluded, namely Prov. xxx.\n28: \"The spider taketh hold with her hands, and is in kings' palaces.\"\nThere is much doubt whether the word _semamith_, which is here\ntranslated a \"spider,\" does not rather allude to the Gecko, a lizard\nwhich has already been described. Moreover, the passage is rendered\nvery differently in the Jewish Bible: \"A spider thou mayest catch with\nthe hands, and is in kings' palaces.\"\n\nBuxtorf mentions some curious Talmudical opinions regarding the Semam.\nFor example, there is a kind of proverb--\"Dreaded as a Semam by a\nscorpion,\" founded on the belief that the Semam, whatever it might be,\ncrept into the ears of the scorpion. Another proverb is, \"A Semam\nagainst a scorpion,\" the idea being that if a Semam was crushed on the\nwound made by a scorpion, it would destroy the effect of the poison.\n\nHe further mentions that the word has been translated as _araneus_ or\n_aranea_, _i.e._ Spider, as _simia_, _i.e._ an ape, as _calamotes_,\nwhich signifies a kind of fish, or as _kalabotes_ and _askalabotes_,\nwhich is a kind of lizard. The Septuagint employs this rendering, to\nwhich Buxtorf himself leans.\n\nThe same word _'akkabish_ occurs twice, and certainly does signify\nsome kind of Spider. The Prophet Isaiah writes of the wicked that they\n\"weave the spider's web\" (lix. 5), and there is a similar image in Job\nviii. 14: \"So are the paths of all that forget God; and the\nhypocrite's hope shall perish. Whose hope shall be cut off, and whose\nhope shall be a spider's web\" (or house). In both instances reference\nis made to the fragility of the Spider's web as a metaphor to express\nthe futility of evil devices.\n\nThe reader will see that in neither of these passages is there\nanything that indicates the species of Spider. There are very many\nspecies of Spider in Palestine; some which spin webs, like the common\nGarden Spider, some which dig subterranean cells and make doors in\nthem, like the well-known Trap-door Spider of Southern Europe, and\nsome which have no webs, but chase their prey upon the ground, like\nthe Wolf and Hunting Spiders. Notice is, however, only taken of those\nwhich spin webs.\n\n\n\n\nANNELIDA.\n\nTHE WORM.\n\n Various words translated as \"Worm\"--Probable confusion of the\n words--The Rimmah and the Tole'ah--The Worm which destroyed\n Jonah's gourd--The Earthworm.\n\n\nThe word \"worm\" occurs many times in the Authorized Version, and is a\nrendering of three Hebrew words. One is _s\u00e2s_, which has been already\nexplained under the article Moth; the second is _rimmah_; and the\nthird _tole'ah_. There is very great difficulty in ascertaining the\nreal signification of these words, unless we assume that the Hebrews\nwere not aware of the distinction between actual Annelida and the\nlarv\u00e6 of various insects.\n\nEven at the present day we commit a similar error. We speak of the\nwire-worm, which is the larva of one kind of beetle. We say that wood\nis worm-eaten, signifying that it has been attacked by the larva of\nanother kind of beetle. Then we use the word \"palmer-worm\" to signify\nthe larva of a moth, \"glow-worm\" to signify a beetle, \"tape-worm\" to\nsignify an entozoon, and--strangest of all--\"blindworm\" to signify a\nlizard which can see perfectly well. We therefore need not wonder that\nthe Hebrew language produces similar confusion of nomenclature.\n\nThe other words are frequently used in connexion with each other. The\nRimmah is the \"worm\" that was bred in the manna when it had been kept\nbeyond the specified time, and it is evident that the larva of some\ninsect, such as the blow-fly, is signified.\n\nThe word is evidently used in the same sense by Job. The \"worm shall\nfeed sweetly on him\" (xxiv. 20). \"They shall lie down alike in the\ndust, and the worms shall cover them\" (xxi. 26). The same word is\nemployed in his lamentation over his evil case: \"My flesh is clothed\nwith worms and clods of dust; my skin is broken, and become loathsome\"\n(vii. 5). In xxv. 6 he uses both words: \"Man that is a worm, and the\nson of man that is a worm.\" This passage is more correctly rendered in\nthe Hebrew Bible: \"Man that is a worm (_rimmah_), and the son of man\nwhich is a maggot\" (_tole'ah_). Both words are also used in connexion\nwith each other by Isaiah: \"The worm (_rimmah_) is spread under thee,\nand the worms (_tola'im_) cover thee\" (xiv. 11).\n\nThe well-known passage in Job xix. 26 is altogether wrongly rendered\nin the text, the marginal translation being much more correct. The\nWorm is not mentioned at all in that passage, which the Jewish Bible\nrenders as follows: \"Even after my skin shall have been stripped off\nthis [body] and flesh, I shall see God.\"\n\nThe Worm which destroyed the gourd of Jonah was a Tolaeth (another\nform of _tole'ah_). See Jonah iv. 7.\n\nThe passage in Micah probably refers to the earthworm: \"They shall\nlick the dust like a serpent, they shall move out of their holes like\nworms of the earth\" (vii. 17). In this case, however, the expression\nis a general one, and, as may be seen by reference to the marginal\ntranslation, is more correctly rendered not as \"worms,\" but as\n\"creeping things.\"\n\n\n\n\nTHE HORSE LEECH.\n\n Signification of the word Alukah--The Arabic word--Leeches in\n Palestine--The horse and the Leech--Leeches in England.\n\n\nIn Prov. xxx. 15 there is a word which only occurs once in the\nScriptures. This is _alukah_, which is translated as horse-leech. \"The\nhorseleech hath two daughters, crying, Give, give.\"\n\nThe Hebrew Bible does not translate the word at all. There is,\nhowever, no doubt that the translation is a correct one. Buxtorf\nrenders the word as _sanguisuga hirudo_, and it is worthy of remark\nthat the Arabic name for the Leech, Aluk, is identical with the Hebrew\nAlukah.\n\nThe Leeches are very common in Palestine, and infest the rivers to\nsuch an extent that they enter the nostrils of animals who come to\ndrink, and cause great annoyance and even danger. The following\nanecdote, related by Mr. H. Dixon in his \"Holy Land,\" gives us a good\nidea of the prevalence of the Leeches, and the tenacity with which\nthey retain their hold:--\n\n\"At Beit-Dejan, on a slight twist in the road, we find the wheel and\nwell, and hear a delicious plash and rustle in the troughs. To slip\nfrom my seat to dip Sabeah's nose into the fluid is the work of a\nsecond; but no sooner has she lapped up a mouthful of water, than one\nsees that the refuse falling back from her lips into the tank is\ndabbled and red. Opening her mouth, I find a gorged leech dangling\nfrom her gum. But the reptile being swept off, and the mare's nose\ndipt into the cooling stream, the blood still flows from between her\nteeth, and, forcing them open, I find two other leeches lodged in the\nroof of her mouth.\n\n\"Poor little beast! how grateful and relieved she seems, how gay, how\ngentle, when I have torn these suckers from her flesh, and soused the\nwater about her wounds; and how my hunting-whip yearns to descend upon\nthe shoulders of that laughing and careless Nubian slave!\"\n\nPersons passing through the river are also attacked by them, and, if\nthey have a delicate skin, suffer greatly. Even in England this will\nhappen. While bathing in a Kentish stream, I have found, when coming\nout of the water, that numbers of Leeches were adhering to me, and\nhave had considerable trouble in removing them.\n\n\n\n\nPROTOZOA AND RADIATA.\n\n\n\n\nSPONGE AND CORAL.\n\n Use of the Sponge in Scripture--Probability that the ancient\n Jews were acquainted with it--Sponges of the Mediterranean--The\n Coral, and its value--Signification of the word _Ramoth_.\n\n\nThere is little to be said on either of these subjects.\n\nSponge is only mentioned with reference to the events of the\nCrucifixion, where it is related that a soldier placed a sponge upon\nhyssop, dipped it in vinegar (_i.e._ the acid wine issued to the Roman\nsoldiers), and held it to the Lord's lips. There is little doubt that\nthe ancient Hebrews were fully aware of the value of the Sponge, which\nthey could obtain from the Mediterranean which skirted all their\nwestern coasts.\n\n\nThe Coral is mentioned in two passages of Scripture: \"No mention shall\nbe made of coral, or of pearls\" (Job xxviii. 18). The second\noccurrence of the word is in Ezek. xxvii. 16: \"They occupied in thy\nfairs with emeralds, purple, and broidered work, and fine linen, and\ncoral, and agate.\"\n\nThis Coral, which is described as being brought from Syria, was\nprobably that of the Red Sea, where the Coral abounds, and where it\nattains the greatest perfection. The Hebrew word, _ramoth_, is\nexpressive of the peculiar growth of the Coral, and signifies high, or\nlofty.\n\n [Illustration: CORAL.\n\n \"_No mention shall be made of coral._\"--REV. xviii. 18.]\n\n\n\n\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n\n A.\n\n Abou Hannes, 489.\n Menzel, 489.\n\n _Accipiter nisus_, 365.\n\n _Acridium peregrinum_, 598.\n\n Acronotus bubalis, 144.\n\n Adas, 143.\n\n Addax, 141.\n\n Adder, 554.\n\n African Elephant, 311.\n\n _Akas_, 143.\n\n _Akbar_, 91.\n\n Ako, 207.\n\n Alpine ibex, 204.\n\n _Ammoperdix Heyii_, 427.\n\n Ammotragus, 186.\n\n Anakah, 69.\n\n Annelida, 644.\n\n Ant, 616.\n Agricultural, 618.\n Mound-making, 618.\n Stinging, 618.\n\n Aoudad, 186.\n\n Ape, 1.\n\n Aphaniptera, 636.\n\n _Apis fasciata_, 612.\n _mellifica_, 606.\n\n Aptera, 636.\n\n _Aquila chrysa\u00ebtos_, 354.\n _mogilnik_, 355.\n\n Arachnida, 640.\n\n _Ardea cinerea_, 470.\n\n Ariel, 136.\n\n Arnebeth, 97.\n\n _Arvicola arvalis_, 93.\n\n _Asinus hemippus_, 280.\n\n Ashkoko, 316.\n\n Ass, 264.\n Domesticated, 264.\n Wild, 279.\n\n _Athene noctua_, 371.\n _Persica_, 371.\n\n _Atta barbara_, 621.\n _malefaciens_, 618.\n\n _Ayzal_, 208.\n\n _Ayzalah_, 208.\n\n Azel, 203.\n\n\n B.\n\n Bactrian Camel, 244.\n\n Badger, 70.\n\n Barbel, 567.\n Long-headed, 567.\n\n _Barbus longiceps_, 566.\n\n Bat, 11.\n\n Bear, 75.\n\n Beden, 203.\n\n Bee, 605.\n Banded, 606.\n Honey, 605.\n\n Behemoth, 318.\n\n Bhunder, 3.\n\n Bison, 131.\n\n Bittern, 80, 462.\n\n Black Vulture, 336.\n\n Blue Thrush, 398.\n\n Bog-bleater, 464.\n\n Bonasus, 131.\n\n Bonnet Monkey, 10.\n\n Boomah, 371.\n\n _Botaurus stellaris_, 462.\n\n Bubale, 143.\n\n _Bubalus buffelus_, 114.\n\n _Bubo ascalaphus_, 373.\n _maximus_, 374.\n _Virginianus_, 374.\n\n Buffalo, 114.\n\n Bull, 101.\n Wild, 119.\n\n Butter, 203.\n bump, 464.\n\n\n C.\n\n _Caccabis saxatilis_, 429.\n\n Calf, 101.\n\n Camel, 216.\n Arabian, 244.\n\n _Camelus Bactrianus_, 216.\n _dromedarius_, 216.\n\n Capistrated Sph\u00e6nops, 533.\n\n _Capra Angorensis_, 202.\n _Mambrica_, 202.\n _Nubiana_, 203.\n _Syriaca_, 202.\n\n _Caprovis Musimon_, 188.\n\n Caspian Emys, 569.\n\n Cat, 36.\n\n Cattle, 101.\n\n Cerastes, 559.\n\n Chameleon, 534.\n\n Chamois, 185.\n\n Chasidah, 478.\n\n _Chephor-peroth_, 88.\n\n Chetah, 29.\n\n Choled, 68.\n\n Cicigna, 533.\n\n _Ciconia nigra_, 483.\n\n _Circa\u00ebtus gallicus_, 355.\n\n _Circus \u00e6ruginosus_, 368.\n _cyaneus_ 369.\n\n Climber, 203.\n\n Cobra, 544.\n\n Cockatrice, 554.\n\n _Columba \u00e6nas_, 419.\n _livia_, 418.\n _palumbus_, 419.\n _Schimperi_, 418.\n\n Coney, 312.\n\n Cora, 136.\n\n Coral, 647.\n\n Corine Antelope, 135.\n\n Corinna, 135.\n\n Cormorant, 490.\n\n _Corvus agricola_, 447.\n _corax_, 447.\n _monedula_, 447.\n _umbrinus_, 447.\n\n _Coryph\u00e6na hippurus_, 571.\n\n Corvphene, 571.\n\n Cow, 101.\n\n Crane, 474.\n\n _Cricetus frumentarius_, 94.\n\n Crocodile, 514.\n\n Crow, Hooded, 447.\n\n Cuckoo, 405.\n\n Culex, 635.\n Great Spotted, 405.\n\n _Cyprinus_, 531.\n\n _Cypselus affinis_, 389.\n _melba_, 389.\n\n\n D.\n\n _Daboia xanthica_, 555.\n\n _Dasypus_, 97.\n\n Deer, 208.\n\n Deloul, 229.\n\n Deror, 384.\n\n Dhubb, 512.\n\n Diadem Staircase Shell, 588.\n\n Dibs, 611.\n\n _Dipsas plicatus_, 593.\n\n Diptera, 632.\n\n _Dipus_, 95.\n\n Dishon, 141.\n\n _D\u00f4b_, 76.\n\n Dog, 39.\n Periwinkle, 586.\n Whelk, 586.\n\n Dor-hawk, 379.\n\n Dormouse, 96.\n\n Dove, 408.\n Barbary, 421.\n Blue Rock, 418.\n Egyptian Rock, 418.\n Ring, 419.\n Stock, 419.\n Wild Rock, 419.\n\n Duck, Hawk, 369.\n\n\n E.\n\n Eagle, 354.\n Fishing, 356.\n Golden, 354.\n Imperial, 355.\n Short-toed, 355.\n\n _Echis arenicola_, 552.\n _carinata_, 553.\n\n _Echeneis remora_, 570.\n\n Egyptian Mastigure, 512.\n\n Elephant, 302.\n\n _Elephas Indicus_, 311.\n\n _Emys caspica_, 509.\n\n _Entellus_, 3, 4.\n\n Epheh, 552.\n\n _Ephialtes Scops_, 377.\n\n _Erinaceus_, 83.\n\n\n F.\n\n _Falco lanarius_, 362.\n _peregrinus_, 362.\n\n Fallow-Deer, 143, 208.\n\n Fan-foot, 69.\n\n Father John, 489.\n Sickle-bill, 489.\n\n _Felis maniculatus_, 37.\n\n Fern Owl, 378.\n\n Ferret, 69.\n\n Fichtall, 186.\n\n Field-mouse, 92.\n\n Fish, Sucking, 570.\n\n Fishes, 563.\n\n Flea, 638.\n\n Fly, 632.\n Camel, 635.\n\n Fowl, Domestic, 421.\n\n Fox, 55.\n\n Francolin, 430.\n\n Frog, 557.\n Edible, 559.\n Green, 559.\n\n\n G.\n\n _Gazella Dorcas_, 133.\n\n Gazelle, 133.\n\n Gecko, 534.\n\n Gier-Eagle, 339.\n\n Glass Snake, 531.\n\n Glede, 361.\n\n Gnat, 635.\n\n Goat, 189.\n\n Goatsucker, 379.\n\n Grayling, Syrian, 631.\n\n Great Shearwater, 407.\n\n Greyhound, 49.\n\n Griffon Vulture, 345.\n\n Groaner, 69.\n\n _Grus cinerea_, 476.\n\n _Gyps fulvus_, 345.\n\n\n H.\n\n _Halicore hemprichii_, 72.\n\n Hamster, 94.\n\n Hare, 96.\n\n Harier Hawk, 367.\n Hen, 369.\n Marsh, 368.\n\n Hart, 208.\n\n Hawk, 364.\n Blue, 369.\n Dove, 369.\n Ring-tailed, 369.\n White, 369.\n\n Hedgehog, 80.\n\n Heifer, 101.\n\n Heirie, 229\n\n Heron, 468\n\n _Herpestes_, 68.\n\n Hind, 208.\n\n _Hircus \u00e6gragus_, 202.\n\n _Hirundo cahirica_, 388.\n _rufula_, 388.\n\n Homoptera, 622.\n\n Honey, 609.\n\n Hoonuman, 3.\n\n Hoopoe, 392.\n\n Hornet, 613.\n\n Horse, 248.\n\n Hunting Leopard, 29.\n\n Hyacinthine Gallinule, 486.\n\n Hy\u00e6na, 62.\n\n _Hydrosaurus niloticus_, 539.\n\n Hymenoptera, 605.\n\n Hyrax, 312.\n\n _Hystrix_, 86.\n\n\n I.\n\n Ibex, Arabian, 203.\n\n Ibis, 488.\n _falcinellus_, 489.\n Glossy or Green, 489.\n _religiosa_, 488.\n White or Sacred, 488.\n\n Insects, 596.\n\n Izab, 506.\n\n\n J.\n\n Jachmur, 143.\n\n Jackal, 55.\n\n Jackdaw, 447.\n\n Jaela, 186, 204.\n\n Jar-Owl, 378.\n\n Jerboa, 95.\n\n\n K.\n\n Kaath, 497.\n\n Kalong, 12.\n\n Kestrel, 365.\n\n Kevel, 136.\n\n Kevella Antelope, 135.\n\n Khopash, 15.\n\n Kipp\u00f4d, 80.\n\n Kite, 357.\n Black, 359.\n Common, 358.\n Egyptian, 360.\n Red, 358.\n\n Klip-das, 315.\n\n _Kophim_, 2.\n\n\n L.\n\n _Lacerta viridis_, 530.\n\n L\u00e4mmergeier, 334.\n\n Lanner Falcon, 362.\n\n Lapwing, 392.\n\n Leech, Horse, 646.\n\n Leopard, 29.\n\n Lepidoptera, 624.\n\n Lerwea, 186.\n\n Let\u00e2\u00e2h, 529.\n\n Leviathan, 514.\n\n Lion, 18.\n\n Lizard, 529.\n Green, 530.\n Jersey, 530.\n Scaly, 529.\n\n Locust, 596.\n Migratory, 596.\n\n Long-horned Gazelle, 136.\n\n Louse, 636.\n\n\n M.\n\n _Macacus Rhesus_, 3.\n\n Macaques, 3.\n\n Magpie, 448.\n\n Maharik, 229.\n\n Makur, 3.\n\n Manx Shearwater, 407.\n\n Martin, 388.\n House, 388.\n Sand, 388.\n\n _Meleagrina margaritifera_, 595.\n\n _Milvus atra_, 358.\n _Egyptiacus_, 360.\n _regalis_, 358.\n\n Mohair Goat, 200.\n\n Mole, 86.\n\n Molluscs, 585.\n\n Monitor, 534.\n Land, 539.\n Nilotic, 539.\n\n Monoceros, 123.\n\n Moor Buzzard, 369.\n\n Mosquito, 635.\n\n Moth, Clothes, 624.\n Grain, 626.\n Silkworm, 627.\n\n Mouflon, 188.\n\n Mouse, 91.\n\n Mule, 285.\n\n _Mullus sur muletus_, 552.\n\n Mur\u00e6na, 567.\n\n _Mur\u00e6na helena_, 566.\n\n _Murex brandaris_, 586.\n _trunculus_, 586.\n\n _Mygale_, 69.\n\n\n N.\n\n _Naja haje_, 544.\n _tripudians_, 545.\n\n _Nates niloticus_, 581.\n\n _Nectarinia Ose\u00e6_, 384.\n\n _Neophron percuopterus_, 341.\n\n Netz, 364.\n\n Night-hawk, 377.\n -jar, 379.\n\n Nil-Bhunder, 6.\n\n Nile Perch, 581.\n\n Nubian Wild Goat, 204.\n\n\n O.\n\n _OEdipoda migratoria_, 596.\n\n Onycha, 590.\n\n Orange-tip, Syrian, 631.\n\n Oreb, 449.\n\n Oryx, 120.\n\n Ospray, 356.\n\n Ossifrage, 334.\n\n Ostrich, 450.\n\n Ounce, 29.\n\n _Ovis Capensis_, 160.\n _cauda obesa_, 160.\n _laticaudatus_, 160.\n _laticauda platycerus_, 160.\n _steatopyga_, 160.\n\n Owl, 370.\n Barn, 373.\n Churn, 378.\n Eagle, 374.\n Egyptian Eagle, 373.\n European Eagle, 374.\n Great, 373.\n Little, 371.\n Little Night, 371.\n Scops, 377.\n Screech, 373.\n Virginian Eared, 374.\n White, 373.\n\n Ox, 101.\n\n _Oxylophus glandarius_, 406.\n\n\n P.\n\n _Pandion halia\u00ebtus_, 356.\n\n Parash, 245.\n\n Partridge, 426.\n Black, 430.\n Desert, 427.\n Greek, 429.\n\n _Passer Cisalpinus_, 402.\n _montanus_, 403.\n _salicarius_, 404.\n\n Peacock, 425.\n\n Pearl, 592.\n Mussel, 593.\n Oyster, 595.\n\n Pelican, 495.\n Crested, 502.\n\n _Pelicanus cristatus_, 502.\n\n _Petrocossyphus cyaneus_, 398.\n\n Pigeon, 418.\n House, 419.\n Rock, 418.\n\n _Plestiodon auratum_, 531.\n\n Porcupine, 85.\n\n _Porphyrio veterum_, 339, 486.\n\n Poultry, 421.\n\n _Presbytes entellus_, 4.\n\n Protozoa, 647.\n\n _Psammosaurus scincus_, 539.\n\n _Pseudopus pallasii_, 531.\n\n Pteropus, 16.\n\n _Puffinus Anglorum_, 407.\n _cinereus_, 407.\n\n _Purpura h\u00e6mastoma_, 586.\n _lapillus_, 586.\n\n Pygarg, 141.\n\n\n Q.\n\n Quail, 430.\n\n _Quercus coccifera_, 623.\n\n\n R.\n\n Radiata, 647.\n\n _Rana esculenta_, 559.\n\n Raven, 439.\n Ashy-necked, 447.\n World-wide, 447.\n\n Red Deer, 208.\n\n Re\u00eam, 121.\n\n _Rhinopoma microphylla_, 18.\n\n _Rhesus_, 3.\n\n Rock Rabbit, 315.\n\n Roe, 133.\n\n Rook, 447.\n\n\n S.\n\n Sand-rat, 96.\n\n Satyr, 10.\n\n _Scalaria diadema_, 588.\n\n Scheltopusic, 531.\n\n _Scincus officinalis_, 531.\n\n Scorpion, 640.\n\n Sel\u00e2v, 534.\n\n Seps, 533.\n\n Serpents, 540.\n\n Sh\u00e2l\u00e2k, 490.\n\n Sheat-fishes, 565.\n\n Sheep, 146.\n\n Shephiphon, 554.\n\n Shrew-mouse, 69.\n\n _Silenus veter_, 6.\n\n _Silurus macracanthus_, 566.\n\n Skink, 531.\n\n Snail, 589.\n\n Snake, Dart, 543.\n Horatta-pam, 553.\n\n Solomon's fleet, 1.\n\n _Spalax_, 88.\n\n Sparrow, 395.\n -hawk, 365.\n House, 404.\n\n _Sph\u00e6nops sepsoides_, 543.\n\n Spider, 443.\n\n Sponge, 647.\n\n Stannel Hawk, 365.\n\n Star-gazer, 581.\n\n Starling, 449.\n\n Steinbok, 203.\n\n Stork, 478.\n Black, 483.\n\n _Strix flammea_, 373.\n\n Surmullet, 582.\n\n _Sus_, 248.\n\n Swallow, 381.\n Oriental, 388.\n Rufous or Russet, 388.\n -tail, Syrian, 631.\n White, 391.\n\n Swan, 485.\n\n Swine, 292.\n\n Swift, 388.\n Alpine, 389.\n Galilean, 389.\n Marsh, 404.\n Spanish, 404.\n Tree, 403.\n\n Syrian Goat, 200.\n Grayling, 631.\n Orange-tip, 631.\n Swallow-tail, 631.\n\n\n T.\n\n _Tabanus marocanus_, 635.\n\n _Tachash_, 70.\n\n _Testudo Gr\u00e6ca_, 507.\n\n _Thynnus thynnus_, 570.\n\n _Tinea granella_, 626.\n\n _Tinnunculus alaudarius_, 365.\n\n _Tinshemeth_, 87, 488.\n\n _T\u00f4_, 116.\n\n Tones, Sacred, 175.\n\n Tortoise, 505.\n\n Toxicoa, 552.\n\n Trumpet, Ram's-horn, 175.\n\n _Truxalis_, 598.\n\n Tsebi, 133.\n\n Tunny, 570.\n\n Turtle Dove, 419.\n Collared, 421.\n Palm, 421.\n\n _Turtur risorius_, 421.\n _Senegalensis_, 421.\n\n Tzippor-deror, 391.\n\n Tzirah, 612.\n\n\n U.\n\n Unicorn, 121.\n\n _Unio margaritiferus_, 593.\n\n _Upupa epops_, 392.\n\n _Uranoscopus-scaber_, 581.\n\n _Ursus Isabellinus_, 76.\n\n Urus, 127.\n\n\n V.\n\n _Vespa orientalis_, 616.\n\n Viper, 552.\n Horned, 551.\n Sand, 552.\n Yellow, 555.\n\n Vulture, Arabian, 348.\n Bearded, 36.\n Egyptian, 339.\n of Scripture, 357.\n\n\n W.\n\n Wall-lizard, 69.\n\n Wanderoo, 6.\n\n Weasel, 68.\n\n Wheel-bird, 379.\n\n Wild Bull, 116.\n Goat, 203.\n Ox, 116.\n\n Wind-hover, 365.\n\n Wing-shell, 590.\n\n Wolf, 50.\n\n Worm, 644.\n Canker, 630.\n Crimson, 622.\n Palmer, 630.\n\n\n X.\n\n _Xantharpya \u00e6gyptiaca_, 16.\n\n\n Y.\n\n Yansh\u00fbph, 373.\n\n\n Z.\n\n Zamar, 186.\n\n _Ze\u00ebb_, 50.\n\n _Zootoca vivipara_, 529.\n\n\n\n\nLONDON: R. CLAY, SONS, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS\n\n\n\nTranscriber's note:\n In the Chapter titled \"Serpents\" there are words with diacritical\n marks not available in the Latin-1 character set:\n se[~c]d[~m],--[~c] c with a tilde above it and [~m] m with\n a tilde above it,\n similitudin[~e].--[~e] e with a tilde above it,\n [~s]pentis,--[~s] s with a tilde above it,\n \u00dea[~i],--[~i] i with a tilde above it,\n [~t]ned,--[~t] t with a tilde above it,\n hi[~r],--[~r] r with a tilde above it,\n \u00deai[~i]r,--[~r] r with a tilde above it, and\n \u00dea[~i],--[~i] I with a tilde above it.\n\n In the Chapter titled \"The Viper, or Epheh.\" is the word\n [)a]k-shoob. The [)a] is an a with a breve accent above it.","title":"Bible animals : $b being a description of every living creature mentioned in the Scripture, from the ape to the coral.","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":243828}