Story of the Bible Animals
by J. G. Wood · English · Gutenberg #44685 · 1,082,855 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Story of the Bible Animals
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Story of the Bible Animals
Author: J. G. Wood
Release date: January 17, 2014 [eBook #44685]
Most recently updated: October 24, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44685
Credits: Produced by Chris Curnow, Julia Neufeld and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK STORY OF THE BIBLE ANIMALS ***
Transcriber's note:
Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
Text enclosed in equal signs is in bold (=350=).
Small capital text has been replaced with all capitals.
* * * * *
[Illustration: THE ANIMALS ENTER THE ARK.
FRONTISPIECE--"STORY OF THE BIBLE ANIMALS."]
STORY
OF THE
BIBLE ANIMALS
A Description of the
Habits and Uses of every living
Creature mentioned in the Scriptures,
WITH
EXPLANATION OF PASSAGES IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT IN
WHICH REFERENCE IS MADE TO THEM.
BY
J. G. WOOD,
AUTHOR OF "HOMES WITHOUT HANDS,"
"THE ILLUSTRATED NATURAL HISTORY," ETC.
300 ILLUSTRATIONS.
PUBLISHED AT THE OFFICE OF
_CHARLES FOSTER'S PUBLICATIONS_,
No. 118 South Seventh Street,
PHILADELPHIA, PA.
[Illustration: WAR-HORSES AND ANCIENT EGYPTIAN CHARIOT.
See page 307.]
COPYRIGHT, 1888, BY W. A. FOSTER.
PREFACE.
Owing to the different conditions of time, language, country, and
race under which the various books of the Holy Scriptures were
written, it is impossible that they should be rightly understood at
the present day without some study of the customs and manners of
Eastern peoples, as well as of the countries in which they lived.
The Oriental character of the scriptural writings causes them to
abound with metaphors and symbols taken from the common life of the
time.
They contain allusions to the trees, flowers, and herbage, the
creeping things of the earth, the fishes of the sea, the birds of
the air, and the beasts which abode with man or dwelt in the deserts
and forests.
Unless, therefore, we understand these writings as those understood
them for whom they were written, it is evident that we shall
misinterpret instead of rightly comprehending them.
The field which is laid open to us is so large that only one
department of Natural History--namely, Zoology--can be treated in
this work, although it is illustrated by many references to other
branches of Natural History, to the physical geography of Palestine,
Egypt, and Syria, the race-character of the inhabitants, and
historical parallels.
The importance of understanding the nature, habits, and uses of
the animals which are constantly mentioned in the Bible, cannot be
overrated as a means of elucidating the Scriptures, and without this
knowledge we shall not only miss the point of innumerable passages
of the Old and New Testaments, but the words of our Lord Himself
will often be totally misinterpreted, or at least lose part of their
significance.
The object of the present work is therefore, to take in its proper
succession, every creature whose name is given in the Scriptures,
and to supply so much of its history as will enable the reader to
understand all the passages in which it is mentioned.
[Illustration: SHEPHERD LEADING SHEEP AND GOATS TO THEIR FOLD IN THE
ROCK.
See page 191.]
THE AUTHOR.
The Rev. J. G. Wood is a native of London, England. He was educated
at Oxford University, and has long been known, both in England
and America, as not only a learned and accurate writer on Natural
History, but a popular one as well, having the happy faculty of
making the results of scientific study and painstaking observation,
interesting and instructive to all classes of readers.
He has published a number of works on the most familiar departments
of the history of animals, designed to awaken popular interest
in the study. Their titles are "Sketches and Anecdotes of Animal
Life;" "Common Objects of the Seashore and Country;" "My Feathered
Friends;" "Homes Without Hands"--being a description of the
habitations of animals,--and the "Illustrated Natural History," a
book which is widely known both in England and America as a standard
work of great value. It has given the author celebrity, and has
caused him to be considered an eminent authority on the subject
which it treats.
It is evident, from these facts, that it would be difficult to find
a man better qualified than Mr. Wood, to write a book describing the
animals mentioned in the Bible.
Profoundly impressed with the ignorance which prevails towards so
important a feature of the Scriptural Narrative, he has devoted his
ripe powers and special knowledge to the work of dissipating it, and
in this volume, not only fully describes the nature and habits of
all the animals mentioned in the Scriptures, but tells the story of
their relations to mankind.
Mr. Wood is a clergyman of the Church of England, and was for a
time connected with Christ Church, Oxford. He has devoted himself
mainly, however, to authorship in the field which he has chosen,
and in which he has become so well known. In his works he usually
employs a popular style of writing, and does not make scientific
terms prominent. This is especially true of the "Story of the Bible
Animals," which from its easy and interesting character is adapted
to the comprehension of young and old.
[Illutration: animals]
Many of the pictures in this book are taken from the living animals,
or from photographs and sketches by Eastern travellers.
Others represent imaginary scenes, or ancient historical events, and
have been designed by skilful artists after careful study of the
subjects.
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
[A complete Index of Subjects will be found at the end of this
Volume.]
NO. PAGE
1. THE ANIMALS ENTER THE ARK 2
2. WAR-HORSES AND ANCIENT EGYPTIAN CHARIOT 4
3. SHEPHERD LEADING SHEEP AND GOATS TO THEIR FOLD IN THE ROCK 6
4. A DESERT-SCENE 8
5. THE GARDEN OF EDEN 19
6. LION DRINKING AT A POOL 21
7. A LION KILLS THE PROPHET FROM JUDAH 22
8. LION AND TIGER 23
9. THE LION REPLIES TO THE THUNDER 25
10. LIONESS AND YOUNG 27
11. LION CARRYING HOME SUPPLIES 31
12. AFRICAN LIONS 32
13. THE LION ATTACKS THE HERD 34
14. THE LAIR OF THE LION 35
15. THE LION LISTENS TO THE APPROACH OF THE HUNTER 39
16. THE LEOPARD 43
17. LEOPARD ATTACKING A HERD OF DEER 45
18. THE LEOPARD LEAPS UPON HIS PREY 47
19. WAITING 49
20. LEOPARD 51
21. CAT AND KITTENS 52
22. CAT 54
23. DOGS IN AN EASTERN CITY AT NIGHT 57
24. SHIMEI EXULTING OVER KING DAVID 59
25. LAZARUS LYING AT THE RICH MAN'S DOOR 62
26. THE DEATH OF JEZEBEL 63
27. SYRIAN DOG 64
28. EASTERN WATER-SELLER 68
29. WOLVES ATTACKING A FLOCK OF SHEEP 70
30. WOLVES CHASING DEER 72
31. THE WOLF 73
32. WOLVES ATTACKING WILD GOATS 75
33. THE JACKAL 76
34. FOXES OR JACKALS DEVOURING THE CARCASE OF A GOAT 77
35. A FEAST IN PROSPECT 79
36. A FEAST SECURED 81
37. A TRESPASSER 83
38. LEOPARD ROBBED OF ITS PREY BY HYÆNAS 87
39. HYÆNAS DEVOURING BONES 89
40. WEASELS 93
41. THE BITER BIT 95
42. BADGERS 99
43. SUPPOSED FORM AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE TABERNACLE 101
44. BEARS DESCENDING THE MOUNTAINS 105
45. ON THE WATCH 107
46. SEEKING AN OUTLOOK 109
47. A FAMILY PARTY 111
48. BEAR 112
49. PORCUPINE 113
50. THE MOLE-RAT 115
51. THE MOUSE 119
52. DAGON FALLEN DOWN BEFORE THE ARK 120
53. MOUSE AND NEST 121
54. JERBOA OR LEAPING-MOUSE 122
55. THE FIELD-MOUSE 123
56. THE SYRIAN HARE 127
57. A TIMID GROUP 129
58. ALTAR OF BURNT-OFFERING 133
59. THE PRODIGAL SON RETURNS 134
60. ABRAHAM OFFERS FOOD TO THE THREE STRANGERS 135
61. OXEN TREADING OUT GRAIN 139
62. EASTERN OX-CART 140
63. THE ARK OF THE COVENANT BEING DRAWN BY COWS 141
64. PLOUGHING WITH OXEN 143
65. MUMMY OF A SACRED BULL TAKEN FROM AN EGYPTIAN TOMB 146
66. ANIMALS BEING SOLD FOR SACRIFICE IN THE PORCH OF THE TEMPLE 147
67. JEROBOAM SETS UP A GOLDEN CALF AT BETHEL 148
68. THE BUFFALO 149
69. THE BHAINSA, OR DOMESTIC BUFFALO, AND CAMEL DRAWING
THE PLOUGH 151
70. WILD BULL OR ORYX 155
71. THE ORYX 157
72. THE UNICORN 158
73. THE BISON 160
74. BISON KILLING WOLF 161
75. THE GAZELLE OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE 163
76. GAZELLES 164
77. THE FALCON USED IN OUR HUNT 168
78. THE ARAB IS DELIGHTED AT THE SUCCESS OF THE HUNT 169
79. THE GAZELLE 170
80. THE ADDAX 172
81. THE BUBALE OR FALLOW DEER OF SCRIPTURE 175
82. SHEEP 176
83. ARABS JOURNEYING TO FRESH PASTURES 178
84. VIEW OF THE PYRAMIDS 179
85. JACOB MEETS RACHEL AT THE WELL 182
86. EASTERN SHEPHERD WATCHING HIS FLOCK 183
87. DAVID GATHERS STONES FROM THE BROOK TO CAST AT
GOLIATH 185
88. AN EASTERN SHEPHERD 186
89. SHEEP FOLLOWING THEIR SHEPHERD 187
90. ANCIENT SHEEP-PEN 190
91. THE POOR MAN'S LAMB 193
92. THE RICH MAN'S FEAST 193
93. FLOCKS OF SHEEP BEING TAKEN INTO JERUSALEM 195
94. SOUNDING THE TRUMPETS IN THE YEAR OF JUBILEE 202
95. RAM'S HORN TRUMPET 203
96. A LAMB UPON THE ALTAR OF BURNT OFFERING 204
97. THE PLACE OF SACRIFICE 206
98. THE CHAMOIS 211
99. CHAMOIS DEFENDING ITS YOUNG 213
100. CHASING THE AOUDAD 214
101. THE MOUFLON 216
102. JACOB DECEIVES HIS FATHER AND TAKES ESAU'S BLESSING 218
103. THE ANGEL APPEARS TO GIDEON 219
104. EASTERN WATER-CARRIERS WITH BOTTLES MADE OF GOAT-SKIN 224
105. GOATS ON THE MARCH 228
106. HERD OF GOATS ATTACKED BY A LION 231
107. ARABIAN IBEX, THE WILD GOAT OF SCRIPTURE 236
108. THE DEER 238
109. RED DEER 239
110. FALLOW DEER OR HIND OF SCRIPTURE 240
111. A QUIET SPOT 241
112. RED DEER AND FAWN 243
113. THE LEADER OF THE HERD 245
114. THE WATCHFUL DOE 247
115. A KNEELING CAMEL 248
116. JACOB LEAVES LABAN AND RETURNS TO CANAAN 249
117. A CAMP IN THE DESERT 250
118. A GRATEFUL SHADE 253
119. CAMELS LADEN WITH BOUGHS 257
120. MORNING IN THE DESERT: STARTING OF THE CARAVAN 258
121. THE CAMEL POST 261
122. A RUNAWAY 263
123. AN ARAB SHEIK MOUNTED UPON HIS CAMEL 264
124. AARON'S ROD BEARS ALMONDS 266
125. CAMEL RIDING 267
126. THE DELOUL, OR SWIFT CAMEL 268
127. ANOTHER MODE OF RIDING THE CAMEL 270
128. PASSING A CAMEL IN A NARROW STREET OF AN EASTERN CITY 277
129. MOSES AT THE BURNING BUSH 278
130. AN ARAB ENCAMPMENT 279
131. ON THE MARCH 281
132. HAIR OF THE CAMEL 283
133. CAMEL GOING THROUGH A "NEEDLE'S EYE" 285
134. A REST IN THE DESERT 287
135. BACTRIAN CAMELS DRAWING CART 289
136. TRIAL OF ARAB HORSES 292
137. AN ARAB HORSE OF THE KOCHLANI BREED 293
138. THE WAR-HORSE 295
139. ARAB HORSES 297
140. BUYING AN ARAB HORSE 299
141. THE ARAB'S FAVORITE STEEDS 301
142. PHARAOH PURSUES THE ISRAELITES WITH CHARIOTS AND
HORSES, AND THE SEA COVERS THEM 302
143. ELIJAH IS CARRIED UP 304
144. THE ISRAELITES, LED BY JOSHUA, TAKE JERICHO 308
145. ANCIENT BATTLEFIELD 309
146. CHARIOT OF STATE 311
147. ANCIENT EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE REPRESENTING A VICTORIOUS
KING IN HIS CHARIOT SLAYING HIS ENEMIES 313
148. MUMMY OF AN EGYPTIAN KING OVER THREE THOUSAND
YEARS OLD 314
149. ASS AND DRIVER 315
150. ENTERING JERUSALEM 317
151. SYRIAN ASSES 319
152. A STREET IN CAIRO, EGYPT 322
153. BEGGAR IN THE STREETS OF CAIRO 324
154. NIGHT-WATCH IN CAIRO 325
155. HUNTING WILD ASSES 331
156. MULES OF THE EAST 334
157. ABSALOM IS CAUGHT IN THE BOUGHS OF AN OAK TREE 335
158. DANIEL REFUSES TO EAT THE KING'S MEAT 337
159. THE PRODIGAL SON 340
160. ELEAZAR REFUSES TO EAT SWINE'S FLESH 341
161. A MOTHER AND HER SEVEN SONS TORTURED FOR REFUSING
TO EAT SWINE'S FLESH 342
162. THE EVIL SPIRITS ENTER A HERD OR SWINE 343
163. WILD BOARS DEVOURING THE CARCASE OF A DEER 344
164. WILD BOARS 345
165. WILD BOARS DESTROYING A VINEYARD 347
166. INDIAN ELEPHANT 349
167. KING SOLOMON, SEATED UPON HIS THRONE, RECEIVES THE
QUEEN OF SHEBA 350
168. INDIAN ELEPHANTS 351
169. THE WAR-ELEPHANT 355
170. AFRICAN ELEPHANTS 359
171. ELEPHANTS' WATERING-PLACE 361
172. TIGER 363
173. TIGER IN THE REEDS 364
174. HEAD OF TIGER 365
175. THE HYRAX 367
176. HIPPOPOTAMUS 372
177. HIPPOPOTAMUS POOL 375
178. THE GREAT JAWS OF THE HIPPOPOTAMUS 376
179. HIPPOPOTAMUS EMERGING FROM THE RIVER 377
180. HIPPOPOTAMUS EATING GRASS 379
181. A HIPPOPOTAMUS-HUNT IN EGYPT 381
182. HIPPOPOTAMUS AND TRAP 384
183. THE BABOON 387
184. THE RHESUS MONKEY 389
185. FEEDING THE MONKEYS IN INDIA 390
186. TROUBLESOME NEIGHBORS 391
187. MONKEYS ENTERING A PLANTATION 392
188. SLOTHFUL MONKEYS 393
189. A PRIVILEGED RACE 394
190. THE WANDEROO 396
191. THE ENEMY DISCOVERED 397
192. BONNET MONKEYS 399
193. THE BAT 401
194. BATS' RESTING-PLACE 403
195. GREAT FOX-HEADED BAT, OR FLYING FOX 405
196. CAVE NEAR THE SITE OF ANCIENT JERICHO 406
197. NIGHT IN THE TROPICS 407
198. LEOPARDS 408
199. THE HOME OF THE VULTURE 411
200. The LÄMMERGEIER 412
201. A SUCCESSFUL DEFENCE 415
202. STRUCK FROM A DIZZY HEIGHT 417
203. THE VULTURE'S NEST 418
204. THE EGYPTIAN VULTURE, OR GIER EAGLE 420
205. VULTURES 425
206. THE EAGLE AND THE HARE 430
207. EAGLES 432
208. EAGLE RETURNING TO THE NEST WITH HER PREY 435
209. THE OSPREY SEARCHING FOR FISH 437
210. SNATCHED FROM THE DEEP: THE OSPREY RISES WITH HIS
PREY 439
211. THE KITE, OR VULTURE OF SCRIPTURE 441
212. THE PEREGRINE FALCON, OR GLEDE 444
213. THE LANNER FALCON 446
214. THE HAWK 447
215. KESTREL HOVERING OVER A FIELD IN SEARCH OF PREY 449
216. THE WIND-HOVER, OR KESTREL 450
217. THE BARN OWL 454
218. THE LITTLE OWL 456
219. CAUGHT NAPPING 457
220. RAVEN.--BARN OWL.--EAGLE OWL 459
221. A FAMILY COUNCIL 460
222. THE NIGHT HAWK ON THE WING 462
223. THE NIGHT HAWK 463
224. THE SWALLOW 466
225. LOST FROM THE FLOCK 469
226. THE SWALLOW AND SWIFT 471
227. VIEW OF THE SEA OF GALILEE 472
228. THE SWALLOW'S FAVORITE HAUNT 473
229. SWALLOWS AT HOME 475
230. THE HOOPOE 478
231. EASTERN HOUSETOPS 479
232. READING THE LAW TO THE PEOPLE AFTER THE RETURN
FROM CAPTIVITY 482
233. THE BLUE THRUSH, OR SPARROW OF SCRIPTURE 483
234. THE TREE SPARROW 485
235. SPARROWS 486
236. A FOREST SCENE 487
237. THE GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOO 488
238. NOAH RECEIVES THE DOVE 489
239. JESUS DRIVES OUT OF THE TEMPLE THE MONEYCHANGERS
AND THOSE WHO SOLD DOVES 493
240. THE ROCK DOVE 494
241. BLUE ROCK PIGEONS 495
242. THE TURTLE DOVE 497
243. THE HEN AND HER BROOD 498
244. THE DOMESTIC FOWL 499
245. POULTRY 500
246. THE PEACOCK 501
247. PEAFOWL 503
248. FEATHERS OF THE PEACOCK 504
249. PARTRIDGES 505
250. THE GREEK PARTRIDGE 507
251. PARTRIDGE AND THEIR YOUNG 508
252. EASTERN QUAIL 509
253. THE QUAIL 510
254. FLIGHT OF QUAIL 515
255. THE RAVEN 517
256. ELIJAH FED BY RAVENS 518
257. RAVENS' ROOSTING-PLACE 521
258. RAVENS' NEST 522
259. OSTRICH AND NEST 527
260. ARABS HUNTING THE OSTRICH 533
261. THE BITTERN 537
262. BITTERN AND CORMORANT 539
263. THE HOME OF THE BITTERN 541
264. THE HERON 543
265. THE HOME OF THE HERON 545
266. THE PAPYRUS PLANT 548
267. THE HOME OF THE CRANE 549
268. THE CRANE 550
269. THE STORK 553
270. STORKS AND THEIR NESTS 555
271. A NEST OF THE WHITE STORK 559
272. IBIS AND GALLINULE 561
273. THE PELICAN 568
274. LIZARDS 575
275. TORTOISES 577
276. THE DHUBB AND THE TORTOISE 578
277. WATER TORTOISE 579
278. CROCODILE ATTACKING HORSES 587
279. A CROCODILE POOL OF ANCIENT EGYPT 590
280. CROCODILES OF THE UPPER NILE 591
281. ICHNEUMON DEVOURING THE EGGS OF THE CROCODILE 597
282. A CROCODILE TRAP 599
283. A FIGHT FOR LIFE 601
284. THE CYPRIUS, OR LIZARD 602
285. THE CHAMELEON 605
286. GECKO AND CHAMELEON 606
287. THE GECKO 609
288. SERPENTS 611
289. BOA CONSTRICTOR AND TIGER 613
290. COBRA AND CERASTES 615
291. THE ISRAELITES ARE BITTEN BY SERPENTS IN THE WILDERNESS,
AND MOSES LIFTS UP THE SERPENT OF BRASS 616
292. THE SERPENT-CHARMER 619
293. THE VIPER 621
294. TEACHING COBRAS TO DANCE 623
295. HORNED VIPER 625
296. THE VIPER, OR EPHEH 627
297. THE TOXICOA 628
298. THE FROG 630
299. FISHES 633
300. A RIVER SCENE 635
301. PETER CATCHES THE FISH 636
302. MURÆNA, LONG-HEADED BARBEL, AND SHEAT FISH 638
303. SUCKING FISH, TUNNY, AND CORYPHENE 640
304. FISHING SCENE ON THE SEA OF GALILEE 642
305. MODE OF DRAGGING THE SEINE NET 645
306. NILE PERCH, SURMULLET, AND STAR-GAZER 647
307. THE PEARL OYSTER 653
308. INSECTS 655
309. A SWARM OF LOCUSTS 659
310. THE LOCUST 663
311. THE BEE 665
312. THE HORNET AND ITS NEST 669
313. ANTS ON THE MARCH 671
314. ANT OF PALESTINE 675
315. THE CRIMSON WORM 677
316. MORDECAI IS LED THROUGH THE CITY UPON THE KING'S
HORSE 679
317. BUTTERFLIES OF PALESTINE 682
318. NOXIOUS FLIES OF PALESTINE 685
319. THE SCORPION 690
320. CORAL 694
[Illustration: more animals]
STORY OF THE BIBLE ANIMALS.
THE LION.
Frequent mention of the Lion in the Scriptures--The Lion
employed as an emblem in the Bible--Similarity of the African
and Asiatic species--The chief characteristics of the Lion--its
strength, activity, and mode of seizing its prey--The Lion hunt.
Of all the undomesticated animals of Palestine, none is mentioned so
frequently as the LION. This may appear the more remarkable, because
for many years the Lion has been extinct in Palestine. The leopard,
the wolf, the jackal, and the hyæna, still retain their place in
the land, although their numbers are comparatively few; but the
Lion has vanished completely out of the land. The reason for this
disappearance is twofold, first, the thicker population; and second,
the introduction of firearms.
No animal is less tolerant of human society than the Lion. In
the first place, it dreads the very face of man, and as a rule,
whenever it sees a man will slink away and hide itself. There are,
of course, exceptional cases to this rule. Sometimes a Lion becomes
so old and stiff, his teeth are so worn, and his endurance so
slight, that he is unable to chase his usual prey, and is obliged
to seek for other means of subsistence. In an unpopulated district,
he would simply be starved to death, but when his lot is cast in
the neighbourhood of human beings, he is perforce obliged to become
a "man-eater." Even in that case, a Lion will seldom attack a man,
unless he should be able to do so unseen, but will hang about the
villages, pouncing on the women as they come to the wells for water,
or upon the little children as they stray from their parents, and
continually shifting his quarters lest he should be assailed during
his sleep. The Lion requires a very large tract of country for his
maintenance, and the consequence is, that in proportion as the land
is populated does the number of Lions decrease.
Firearms are the special dread of the Lion. In the first place, the
Lion, like all wild beasts, cannot endure fire, and the flash of the
gun terrifies him greatly. Then, there is the report, surpassing
even his roar in resonance; and lastly, there is the unseen bullet,
which seldom kills him at once, but mostly drives him to furious
anger by the pain of his wound, yet which he does not dread nearly
so much as the harmless flash and report. There is another cause of
the Lion's banishment from the Holy Land. It is well known that to
attract any wild beast or bird to some definite spot, all that is
required is to provide them with a suitable and undisturbed home,
and a certainty of food. Consequently, the surest method of driving
them away is to deprive them of both these essentials. Then the Lion
used to live in forests, which formerly stretched over large tracts
of ground, but which have long since been cut down, thus depriving
the Lion of its home, while the thick population and the general use
of firearms have deprived him of his food. In fact, the Lion has
been driven out of Palestine, just as the wolf has been extirpated
from England.
But, in the olden times, Lions must have been very plentiful.
There is scarcely a book in the Bible, whether of the Old or New
Testaments, whether historical or prophetical, that does not contain
some mention of this terrible animal; sometimes describing the
actions of individual Lions, but mostly using the word as an
emblem of strength and force, whether used for a good purpose or
abused for a bad one.
[Illustration: LION DRINKING AT A POOL.]
[Illustration: A LION KILLS THE PROPHET FROM JUDAH.]
There are several varieties of Lion, which may be reduced to two,
namely, the African and the Asiatic Lion. It is almost certain,
however, that these animals really are one and the same species,
and that the trifling differences which exist between an African
and an Asiatic Lion, are not sufficient to justify a naturalist in
considering them to be distinct species. The habits of both are
identical, modified, as is sure to be the case, by the difference of
locality; but then, such variations in habit are continually seen in
animals confessedly of the same species, which happen to be placed
in different conditions of climate and locality.
That it was once exceedingly plentiful in Palestine is evident, from
a very cursory knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. It is every where
mentioned as a well-known animal, equally familiar and dreaded. When
the disobedient prophet was killed by the Lion near Bethel, the fact
seemed not to have caused any surprise in the neighbourhood. When
the people came out to rescue the body of the prophet, they wondered
much because the Lion was standing by the fallen man, but had not
torn him, and had left the ass unhurt. But that a Lion should have
killed a man seems to have been an event which was not sufficiently
rare to be surprising.
We will now proceed to those characteristics of the Lion which bear
especial reference to the Scriptures.
In the first place, size for size, the Lion is one of the strongest
of beasts.
[Illustration: LION AND TIGER.]
Moreover, the strength of the Lion is equally distributed over the
body and limbs, giving to the animal an easy grace of movement which
is rare except with such a structure. A full-grown Lion cannot only
knock down and kill, but can carry away in its mouth, an ordinary
ox; and one of these terrible animals has been known to pick up a
heifer in its mouth, and to leap over a wide ditch still carrying
its burden. Another Lion carried a two-year old heifer, and was
chased for five hours by mounted farmers, so that it must have
traversed a very considerable distance. Yet, in the whole of this
long journey, the legs of the heifer had only two or three times
touched the ground.
It kills man, and comparatively small animals, such as deer and
antelopes, with a blow of its terrible paw; and often needs to
give no second blow to cause the death of its victim. The sharp
talons are not needed to cause death, for the weight of the blow is
sufficient for that purpose.
When the hunter pursues it with dogs, after the usual fashion,
there is often a great slaughter among them, especially among those
that are inexperienced in the chase of the Lion. Urged by their
instinctive antipathy, the dogs rush forward to the spot where the
Lion awaits them, and old hounds bay at him from a safe distance,
while the young and inexperienced among them are apt to convert the
sham attack into a real one. Their valour meets with a poor reward,
for a few blows from the Lion's terrible paws send his assailants
flying in all directions, their bodies streaming with blood, and in
most cases a fatal damage inflicted, while more than one unfortunate
dog lies fairly crushed by the weight of a paw laid with apparent
carelessness upon its body. There is before me a Lion's skin, a
spoil of one of these animals shot by the celebrated sportsman,
Gordon Cumming. Although the skin lies flat upon the floor, and the
paws are nothing but the skin and talons, the weight of each paw is
very considerable, and always surprises those who hear it fall on
the floor.
There are several Hebrew words which are used for the Lion, but
that which signifies the animal in its adult state is derived from
an Arabic word signifying strength; and therefore the Lion is
called the Strong-one, just as the Bat is called the Night-flier.
No epithet could be better deserved, for the Lion seems to be a
very incarnation of strength, and, even when dead, gives as vivid
an idea of concentrated power as when it was living. And, when the
skin is stripped from the body, the tremendous muscular development
never fails to create a sensation of awe. The muscles of the limbs,
themselves so hard as to blunt the keen-edged knives employed by a
dissecter, are enveloped in their glittering sheaths, playing upon
each other like well-oiled machinery, and terminating in tendons
seemingly strong as steel, and nearly as impervious to the knife.
Not until the skin is removed can any one form a conception of the
enormously powerful muscles of the neck, which enable the Lion to
lift the weighty prey which it kills, and to convey it to a place
of security.
[Illustration: THE LION REPLIES TO THE THUNDER.]
Although usually unwilling to attack an armed man, it is one of the
most courageous animals in existence when it is driven to fight, and
if its anger is excited, it cares little for the number of its foes,
or the weapons with which they are armed. Even the dreaded firearms
lose their terrors to an angry Lion, while a Lioness, who fears
for the safety of her young, is simply the most terrible animal
in existence. We know how even a hen will fight for her chickens,
and how she has been known to beat off the fox and the hawk by the
reckless fury of her attack. It may be easily imagined, therefore,
that a Lioness actuated by equal courage, and possessed of the
terrible weapons given to her by her Creator, would be an animal
almost too formidable for the conception of those who have not
actually witnessed the scene of a Lioness defending her little ones.
The roar of the Lion is another of the characteristics for which it
is celebrated. There is no beast that can produce a sound that could
for a moment be mistaken for the roar of the Lion. The Lion has a
habit of stooping his head towards the ground when he roars, so
that the terrible sound rolls along like thunder, and reverberates
in many an echo in the far distance. Owing to this curious habit,
the roar can be heard at a very great distance, but its locality
is rendered uncertain, and it is often difficult to be quite sure
whether the Lion is to the right or the left of the hearer.
There are few sounds which strike more awe than the Lion's roar.
Even at the Zoological Gardens, where the hearer knows that he is in
perfect safety, and where the Lion is enclosed in a small cage faced
with strong iron bars, the sound of the terrible roar always has
a curious effect upon the nerves. It is not exactly fear, because
the hearer knows that he is safe; but it is somewhat akin to the
feeling of mixed awe and admiration with which one listens to the
crashing thunder after the lightning has sped its course. If such be
the case when the Lion is safely housed in a cage, and is moreover
so tame that even if he did escape, he would be led back by the
keeper without doing any harm, the effect of the roar must indeed be
terrific when the Lion is at liberty, when he is in his own country,
and when the shades of evening prevent him from being seen even at a
short distance.
[Illustration: LIONESS AND YOUNG.]
In the dark, there is no animal so invisible as a Lion. Almost
every hunter has told a similar story--of the Lion's approach at
night, of the terror displayed by dogs and cattle as he drew near,
and of the utter inability to see him, though he was so close that
they could hear his breathing. Sometimes, when he has crept near
an encampment, or close to a cattle inclosure, he does not proceed
any farther lest he should venture within the radius illumined by
the rays of the fire. So he crouches closely to the ground, and,
in the semi-darkness, looks so like a large stone, or a little
hillock, that any one might pass close to it without perceiving its
real nature. This gives the opportunity for which the Lion has been
watching, and in a moment he strikes down the careless straggler,
and carries off his prey to the den. Sometimes, when very much
excited, he accompanies the charge with a roar, but, as a general
fact, he secures his prey in silence.
The roar of the Lion is very peculiar. It is not a mere outburst of
sound, but a curiously graduated performance. No description of the
Lion's roar is so vivid, so true, and so graphic as that of Gordon
Cumming: "One of the most striking things connected with the Lion
is his voice, which is extremely grand and peculiarly striking.
It consists at times of a low, deep moaning, repeated five or six
times, ending in faintly audible sighs. At other times he startles
the forest with loud, deep-toned, solemn roars, repeated five or six
times in quick succession, each increasing in loudness to the third
or fourth, when his voice dies away in five or six low, muffled
sounds, very much resembling distant thunder. As a general rule,
Lions roar during the night, their sighing moans commencing as the
shades of evening envelop the forest, and continuing at intervals
throughout the night. In distant and secluded regions, however, I
have constantly heard them roaring loudly as late as nine or ten
o'clock on a bright sunny morning. In hazy and rainy weather they
are to be heard at every hour in the day, but their roar is subdued."
Lastly, we come to the dwelling-place of the Lion. This animal
always fixes its residence in the depths of some forest, through
which it threads its stealthy way with admirable certainty. No fox
knows every hedgerow, ditch, drain, and covert better than the
Lion knows the whole country around his den. Each Lion seems to
have his peculiar district, in which only himself and his family
will be found. These animals seem to parcel out the neighbourhood
among themselves by a tacit law like that which the dogs of eastern
countries have imposed upon themselves, and which forbids them to
go out of the district in which they were born. During the night he
traverses his dominions; and, as a rule, he retires to his den as
soon as the sun is fairly above the horizon. Sometimes he will be
in wait for prey in the broadest daylight, but his ordinary habits
are nocturnal, and in the daytime he is usually asleep in his secret
dwelling-place.
We will now glance at a few of the passages in which the Lion is
mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, selecting those which treat of its
various characteristics.
The terrible strength of the Lion is the subject of repeated
reference. In the magnificent series of prophecies uttered by
Jacob on his deathbed, the power of the princely tribe of Judah
is predicted under the metaphor of a Lion--the beginning of its
power as a Lion's whelp, the fulness of its strength as an adult
Lion, and its matured establishment in power as the old Lion that
couches himself and none dares to disturb him. Then Solomon, in the
Proverbs, speaks of the Lion as the "strongest among beasts, and
that turneth not away for any."
Solomon also alludes to its courage in the same book, Prov.
xxviii. 1, in the well-known passage, "The wicked fleeth when no
man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion." And, in 2
Sam. xxiii. 20, the courage of Benaiah, one of the mighty three of
David's army, is specially honoured, because he fought and killed a
Lion single-handed, and because he conquered "two lion-like men of
Moab." David, their leader, had also distinguished himself, when a
mere keeper of cattle, by pursuing and killing a Lion that had come
to plunder his herd. In the same book of Samuel which has just been
quoted (xvii. 10), the valiant men are metaphorically described as
having the hearts of Lions.
The ferocity of this terrible beast of prey is repeatedly mentioned,
and the Psalms are full of such allusions, the fury and anger of
enemies being compared to the attacks of the Lion.
Many passages refer to the Lion's roar, and it is remarkable that
the Hebrew language contains several words by which the different
kind of roar is described. One word, for example, represents the
low, deep, thunder-like roar of the Lion seeking its prey, and which
has already been mentioned. This is the word which is used in Amos
iii. 4, "Will a lion roar in the forest when he hath no prey?" and
in this passage the word which is translated as Lion signifies the
animal when full grown and in the prime of life. Another word is
used to signify the sudden exulting cry of the Lion as it leaps
upon its victim. A third is used for the angry growl with which a
Lion resents any endeavour to deprive it of its prey, a sound with
which we are all familiar, on a miniature scale, when we hear a cat
growling over a mouse which she has just caught. The fourth term
signifies the peculiar roar uttered by the young Lion after it has
ceased to be a cub and before it has attained maturity. This last
term is employed in Jer. li. 38, "They shall _roar_ together like
lions; they shall _yell_ as lions' whelps," in which passage two
distinct words are used, one signifying the roar of the Lion when
searching after prey, and the other the cry of the young Lions.
The prophet Amos, who in his capacity of herdsman was familiar
with the wild beasts, from which he had to guard his cattle, makes
frequent mention of the Lion, and does so with a force and vigour
that betoken practical experience. How powerful is this imagery,
"The lion hath roared; who will not fear? The Lord God hath spoken;
who can but prophesy?" Here we have the picture of the man himself,
the herdsman and prophet, who had trembled many a night, as the
Lions drew nearer and nearer; and who heard the voice of the Lord,
and his lips poured out prophecy. Nothing can be more complete than
the parallel which he has drawn. It breathes the very spirit of
piety, and may bear comparison even with the prophecies of Isaiah
for its simple grandeur.
It is remarkable how the sacred writers have entered into the spirit
of the world around them, and how closely they observed the minutest
details even in the lives of the brute beasts. There is a powerful
passage in the book of Job, iv. 11, "The old lion perisheth for lack
of prey," in which the writer betrays his thorough knowledge of the
habits of the animal, and is aware that the usual mode of a Lion's
death is through hunger, in consequence of his increasing inability
to catch prey.
The nocturnal habits of the Lion and its custom of lying in wait
for prey are often mentioned in the Scriptures. The former habit is
spoken of in that familiar and beautiful passage in the Psalms (civ.
20), "Thou makest darkness, and it is night; wherein all the beasts
of the forest do creep forth. The young Lions roar after their
prey; and seek their meat from God. The sun ariseth, they gather
themselves together, and lay them down in their dens."
[Illustration: LION CARRYING HOME SUPPLIES.]
An animal so destructive among the flocks and herds could not be
allowed to carry out its depredations unchecked, and as we have
already seen, the warfare waged against it has been so successful,
that the Lions have long ago been fairly extirpated in Palestine.
The usual method of capturing or killing the Lion was by pitfalls or
nets, to both of which there are many references in the Scriptures.
The mode of hunting the Lion with nets was identical with that which
is practised in India at the present time. The precise locality of
the Lion's dwelling-place having been discovered, a circular wall
of net is arranged round it, or if only a few nets can be obtained,
they are set in a curved form, the concave side being towards the
Lion. They then send dogs into the thicket, hurl stones and sticks
at the den, shoot arrows into it, fling burning torches at it, and
so irritate and alarm the animal that it rushes against the net,
which is so made that it falls down and envelopes the animal in its
folds. If the nets be few, the drivers go to the opposite side of
the den, and induce the Lion to escape in the direction where he
sees no foes, but where he is sure to run against the treacherous
net. Other large and dangerous animals were also captured by the
same means.
[Illustration: AFRICAN LIONS.]
Another and more common, because an easier and a cheaper method was,
by digging a deep pit, covering the mouth with a slight covering
of sticks and earth, and driving the animal upon the treacherous
covering. It is an easier method than the net, because after the pit
is once dug, the only trouble lies in throwing the covering over
its mouth. But, it is not so well adapted for taking beasts alive,
as they are likely to be damaged, either by the fall into the pit,
or by the means used in getting them out again. Animals, therefore,
that are caught in pits are generally, though not always, killed
before they are taken out. The net, however, envelops the animal so
perfectly, and renders it so helpless, that it can be easily bound
and taken away. The hunting net is very expensive, and requires a
large staff of men to work it, so that none but a rich man could use
it in hunting.
The passages in which allusion is made to the use of the pitfall in
hunting are too numerous to be quoted, and it will be sufficient
to mention one or two passages, such as those wherein the Psalmist
laments that his enemies have hidden for him their net in a pit, and
that the proud have digged pits for him.
Lions that were taken in nets seem to have been kept alive in dens,
either as mere curiosities, or as instruments of royal vengeance.
Such seems to have been the object of the Lions which were kept by
Darius, into whose den Daniel was thrown, by royal command, and
which afterwards killed his accusers when thrown into the same den.
It is plain that the Lions kept by Darius must have been exceedingly
numerous, because they killed at once the accusers of Daniel, who
were many in number, together with their wives and children, who,
in accordance with the cruel custom of that age and country, were
partakers of the same punishment with the real culprits. The whole
of the first part of Ezek. xix. alludes to the custom of taking
Lions alive and keeping them in durance afterwards.
Sometimes the Lion was hunted as a sport, but this amusement
seems to have been restricted to the great men, on account of its
expensive nature. Such hunting scenes are graphically depicted in
the famous Nineveh sculptures, which represent the hunters pursuing
their mighty game in chariots, and destroying them with arrows.
Rude, and even conventional as are these sculptures, they have a
spirit, a force, and a truthfulness, that prove them to have been
designed by artists to whom the scene was a familiar one.
[Illustration: THE LION ATTACKS THE HERD.]
Upon the African Continent the Lion reigns supreme, monarch of the
feline race.
Whatever may be said of the distinction between the Asiatic and
African Lion, there seems to be scarcely sufficient grounds for
considering the very slight differences a sufficient warrant for
constituting separate species. From all accounts, it seems that
the habits of all Lions are very similar, and that a Lion acts
like a Lion whether found in Africa or Asia.
[Illustration: THE LAIR OF THE LION.]
An old Boer, as the Dutch settlers of Southern Africa are called,
gave me a most interesting account of an adventure with a Lion.
The man was a well-known hunter, and lived principally by the sale
of ivory and skins. He was accustomed each year to make a trip into
the game country, and traded with the Kaffirs, or native blacks,
under very favorable auspices. His stock in trade consisted of guns
and ammunition, several spans of fine oxen, some horses, and about a
dozen dogs.
A Lion which appeared to have been roaming about the country
happened to pass near this hunter's camp, and scenting the horses
and oxen, evidently thought that the location would suit him for
a short period. A dense wood situated about a mile from the camp
afforded shelter, and this spot the Lion selected as a favorable
position for his headquarters.
The hunter had not to wait for more than a day, before the
suspicions which had been aroused by some broad footmarks, which he
saw imprinted in the soil, were confirmed into a certainty that a
large Lion was concealed near his residence.
It now became a question of policy whether the Boer should attack
the Lion, or wait for the Lion to attack him. He thought it possible
that the savage beast, having been warned off by the dogs, whose
barking had been continued and furious during the night on which the
Lion was supposed to have passed, might think discretion the better
part of valor, and consequently would move farther on, in search of
a less carefully guarded locality upon which to quarter himself. He
determined, therefore, to wait, but to use every precaution against
a night-surprise.
The Lion, however, was more than a match for the man; for during the
second night a strong ox from his best span was quietly carried off,
and, although there was some commotion among the dogs and cattle, it
was then thought that the alarm had scared the Lion away.
The morning light, however, showed that the beast had leaped the
fence which surrounded the camp, and, having killed the ox, had
evidently endeavored to scramble over it again with the ox in his
possession. The weight of the Lion and the ox had caused the stakes
to give way, and the Lion had easily carried off his prey through
the aperture.
The track of the Lion was immediately followed by the Boer, who took
with him a negro and half a dozen of his best dogs. The tracks were
easily seen, and the hunter had no difficulty in deciding that the
Lion was in the wood previously mentioned. But this in itself was no
great advance, for the place was overgrown with a dense thicket of
thorn-bushes, creepers, and long grass, forming a jungle so thick
and impenetrable that for a man to enter seemed almost impossible.
It was therefore agreed that the Boer should station himself on one
side, while the negro went to the other side of the jungle, the dogs
meanwhile being sent into the thicket.
This arrangement, it was hoped, would enable either the hunter or
the negro to obtain a shot; for they concluded that the dogs, which
were very courageous animals, would drive the Lion out of the bushes.
The excited barking of the dogs soon indicated that they had
discovered the Lion, but they appeared to be unable to drive him
from his stronghold; for, although they would scamper away every now
and then, as though the enraged monster was chasing them, still they
returned to bark at the same spot.
Both of the hunters fired several shots, with the hope that a stray
bullet might find its way through the underwood to the heart of the
savage beast, but a great quantity of ammunition was expended and no
result achieved.
At length, as the dogs had almost ceased to bark, it was considered
advisable to call them off. But all the whistling and shouting
failed to recall more than two out of the six, and one of these was
fearfully wounded. The others, it was afterwards found, had been
killed by the Lion: a blow from his paw had sufficed to break the
back or smash the skull of all which had come within his reach.
Thus the first attempt on the Lion was a total failure, and the
hunter returned home lamenting the loss of his dogs, and during the
night watched beside his enclosure; but the Lion did not pay him a
second visit.
Early on the following evening, accompanied by the negro, he started
afresh for the wood; and, having marked the spot from which the Lion
had on the former occasion quitted the dense thorny jungle, the two
hunters ascended a tree and watched during the whole night in the
hope of obtaining a shot at the hated marauder. But while they
were paying the residence of the Lion a visit _he_ favored the camp
with a call, and this time, by way of variety, carried away a very
valuable horse, which he conveyed to the wood, being wise enough
to walk out and to return by a different path from that he had
previously used, consequently avoiding the ambush prepared for him.
When the hunter returned to his camp, he was furious at this new
loss, and determined upon a plan which, though dangerous, still
appeared the most likely to insure the destruction of the ravenous
monster.
This plan was to enter the wood alone, without attendant or dogs,
and with noiseless, stealthy movements creep near enough to the Lion
to obtain a shot.
Now, when we consider the difficulty of moving through thick bushes
without making a noise, and remember the watchful habits of every
member of the cat tribe, we may be certain that to surprise the Lion
was a matter of extreme difficulty, and that the probability was
that the hunter would meet with disaster.
At about ten o'clock on the morning after the horse-slaughter,
the hunter started for the wood armed with a double-barrelled
smooth-bore gun, and prepared to put forth his utmost skill in
stalking his dangerous enemy.
Now, it is the nature of the Lion, when gorged, to sleep during the
day; and if the animal has carried off any prey, it usually conceals
itself near the remnants of its feast, to watch them until ready for
another meal.
The hunter was aware of this, and laid his plans very judiciously.
He approached the wood slowly and silently, found the track of the
Lion, and began tracing it to find the spot where the remains of the
horse could be seen.
He moved forward very slowly and with great caution, being soon
surrounded by the thick bushes, the brightness of the plain also
being succeeded by the deep gloom of the wood. Being an experienced
hand at bush-craft, he was able to walk or crawl without causing
either a dried stick to crack or a leaf to rustle, and he was aware
that his progress was without noise; for the small birds, usually so
watchful and alert, flew away only when he approached close to them,
thus showing that their eyes, and not their ears, had made them
conscious of the presence of man.
Birds and monkeys are the great obstacles in the bush to the
success of a surprise, for the birds fly from tree to tree and
whistle or twitter, whilst the monkeys chatter and grimace,
expressing by all sorts of actions that a strange creature is
approaching. When, therefore, the bushranger finds that birds and
monkeys are unconscious of his presence until they see him, he may
be satisfied that he has traversed the bush with tolerable silence,
and has vanquished such dangerous betrayers of his presence as dried
sticks and dead leaves.
[Illustration: THE LION LISTENS TO THE APPROACH OF THE HUNTER.]
The hunter had not proceeded thus more than fifty yards into the
jungle, before he found indications that he was close upon the lair
of the Lion: a strong leonine scent was noticeable, and part of
the carcase of his horse was visible between the bushes. Instead,
therefore, of advancing farther, as an incautious or inexperienced
bushranger would have done, he crouched down behind a bush and
remained motionless.
All animals are aware of the advantages of a surprise, and the
cat tribe especially practise the ambuscading system. The hunter,
therefore, determined, if possible, to turn the tables on the Lion,
and to surprise, rather than to be surprised.
He concluded that the Lion, even when gorged with horseflesh, would
not be so neglectful of his safety as to sleep with more than one
eye closed, and that, although he had crept with great care through
the bush, he had probably, from some slight sound, caused the Lion
to be on the alert; if, therefore, he should approach the carcase of
the horse, he might be pounced upon at once.
After remaining silent and watchful for several minutes, the hunter
at length saw that an indistinctly-outlined object was moving behind
some large broad-leafed plants at about twenty paces from him.
This object was the Lion. It was crouched behind some shrubs,
attentively watching the bushes where the hunter was concealed. Its
head only was clearly visible, the body being hidden by the foliage.
It was evident that the Lion was suspicious of something, but was
not certain that anything had approached.
The hunter, knowing that this was a critical period for him,
remained perfectly quiet. He did not like to risk a shot at the
forehead of the Lion, for it would require a very sure aim to insure
a death-wound, and the number of twigs and branches would be almost
certain to deflect the bullet.
The Lion, after a careful inspection, appeared to be satisfied, and
laid down behind the shrubs. The hunter then cocked both barrels
of his heavy gun and turned the muzzle slowly around, so that he
covered the spot on which the Lion lay, and shifted his position so
as to be well placed for a shot.
The slight noise he made in moving, attracted the attention of the
Lion, who immediately rose to his feet. A broadside shot, which was
the most sure, could not be obtained, so the hunter fired at the
head of the animal, aiming for a spot between the eyes. The ball
struck high, as is usually the case when the distance is short, and
the charge of powder heavy, but the Lion fell over on its back,
rising, however, almost immediately and uttering a terrific roar.
In regaining its feet it turned its side to the hunter, giving him
the opportunity he had so anxiously waited for. Aiming at a spot
behind the shoulder, he fired again, and had the satisfaction of
seeing the savage beast, maddened by the pain of a mortal wound,
tearing up the ground in its fury within a very few paces of his
hiding-place.
By degrees its fierce roars subsided into angry growls, and the
growls into heavy moans, until the terrible voice was hushed and
silence reigned throughout the wood.
The hunter immediately started off home, and brought his negroes and
dogs to the spot, where they found stretched dead upon the ground a
Lion of the largest size.
Before sunset that evening its skin was pegged down at the hunter's
camp, and all were filled with delight, knowing that they would be
no more disturbed by the fierce marauder.
THE LEOPARD.
The Leopard not often mentioned in the Scriptures--its
attributes exactly described--Probability that several animals
were classed under the name--How the Leopard takes its
prey--Craft of the Leopard--its ravages among the flocks--The
empire of man over the beast--The Leopard at Bay--Localities
wherein the Leopard lives--The skin of the Leopard--Various
passages of Scripture explained.
Of the LEOPARD but little is said in the Holy Scriptures.
In the New Testament this animal is only mentioned once, and
then in a metaphorical rather than a literal sense. In the Old
Testament it is casually mentioned seven times, and only in two
places is the word Leopard used in the strictly literal sense.
Yet, in those brief passages of Holy Writ, the various attributes
of the animal are delineated with such fidelity, that no one could
doubt that the Leopard was familiarly known in Palestine. Its
colour, its swiftness, its craft, its ferocity, and the nature of
its dwelling-place, are all touched upon in a few short sentences
scattered throughout the Old Testament, and even its peculiar habits
are alluded to in a manner that proves it to have been well known at
the time when the words were written.
It is my purpose in the following pages to give a brief account of
the Leopard of the Scriptures, laying most stress on the qualities
to which allusion is made, and then to explain the passages in which
the name of the animal occurs.
In the first place, it is probable that under the word Leopard are
comprehended three animals, two of which, at least, were thought to
be one species until the time of Cuvier. These three animals are the
LEOPARD proper (_Leopardus varius_), the OUNCE (_Leopardus uncia_),
and the CHETAH, or HUNTING LEOPARD (_Gueparda jubata_). All these
three species belong to the same family of animals; all are spotted
and similar in colour, all are nearly alike in shape, and all are
inhabitants of Asia, while two of them, the Leopard and the Chetah,
are also found in Africa.
It is scarcely necessary to mention that the Leopard is a beast
of prey belonging to the cat tribe, that its colour is tawny,
variegated with rich black spots, and that it is a fierce and
voracious animal, almost equally dreaded by man and beast. It
inhabits many parts of Africa and Asia, and in those portions of
the country which are untenanted by mankind, it derives all its
sustenance from the herb-eating animals of the same tracts.
[Illustration: THE LEOPARD.]
To deer and antelopes it is a terrible enemy, and in spite of their
active limbs, seldom fails in obtaining its prey. Swift as is the
Leopard, for a short distance, and wonderful as its spring, it has
not the enduring speed of the deer or antelope, animals which are
specially formed for running, and which, if a limb is shattered,
can run nearly as fast and quite as far on three legs as they
can when all four limbs are uninjured. Instinctively knowing its
inferiority in the race, the Leopard supplies by cunning the want of
enduring speed.
It conceals itself in some spot whence it can see far around without
being seen, and thence surveys the country. A tree is the usual
spot selected for this purpose, and the Leopard, after climbing the
trunk by means of its curved talons, settles itself in the fork of
the branches, so that its body is hidden by the boughs, and only
its head is shown between them. With such scrupulous care does it
conceal itself, that none but a practised hunter can discover it,
while any one who is unaccustomed to the woods cannot see the animal
even when the tree is pointed out to him.
As soon as the Leopard sees the deer feeding at a distance, he
slips down the tree and stealthily glides off in their direction.
He has many difficulties to overcome, because the deer are among
the most watchful of animals, and if the Leopard were to approach
to the windward, they would scent him while he was yet a mile away
from them. If he were to show himself but for one moment in the
open ground he would be seen, and if he were but to shake a branch
or snap a dry twig he would be heard. So, he is obliged to approach
them against the wind, to keep himself under cover, and yet to
glide so carefully along that the heavy foliage of the underwood
shall not be shaken, and the dry sticks and leaves which strew the
ground shall not be broken. He has also to escape the observation of
certain birds and beasts which inhabit the woods, and which would
certainly set up their alarm-cry as soon as they saw him, and so
give warning to the wary deer, which can perfectly understand a cry
of alarm, from whatever animal it may happen to proceed.
Still, he proceeds steadily on his course, gliding from one covert
to another, and often expending several hours before he can proceed
for a mile. By degrees he contrives to come tolerably close to them,
and generally manages to conceal himself in some spot towards which
the deer are gradually feeding their way. As soon as they are near
enough, he collects himself for a spring, just as a cat does when
she leaps on a bird, and dashes towards the deer in a series of
mighty bounds. For a moment or two they are startled and paralysed
with fear at the sudden appearance of their enemy, and thus give
him time to get among them. Singling out some particular animal, he
leaps upon it, strikes it down with one blow of his paw, and then,
couching on the fallen animal, he tears open its throat, and laps
the flowing blood.
[Illustration: LEOPARD ATTACKING A HERD OF DEER.]
In this manner does it obtain its prey when it lives in the desert,
but when it happens to be in the neighbourhood of human habitations,
it acts in a different manner. Whenever man settles himself in any
place, his presence is a signal for the beasts of the desert and
forest to fly. The more timid, such as the deer and antelope, are
afraid of him, and betake themselves as far away as possible. The
more savage inhabitants of the land, such as the lion, leopard, and
other animals, wage an unequal war against him for a time, but are
continually driven farther and farther away, until at last they
are completely expelled from the country. The predaceous beasts
are, however, loth to retire, and do so by very slow degrees. They
can no longer support themselves on the deer and antelopes, but
find a simple substitute for them in the flocks and herds which
man introduces, and in the seizing of which there is as much craft
required as in the catching of the fleeter and wilder animals. Sheep
and goats cannot run away like the antelopes, but they are penned so
carefully within inclosures, and guarded so watchfully by herdsmen
and dogs, that the Leopard is obliged to exert no small amount of
cunning before it can obtain a meal.
Sometimes it creeps quietly to the fold, and escapes the notice of
the dogs, seizes upon a sheep, and makes off with it before the
alarm is given. Sometimes it hides by the wayside, and as the flock
pass by it dashes into the midst of them, snatches up a sheep, and
disappears among the underwood on the opposite side of the road.
Sometimes it is crafty enough to deprive the fold of its watchful
guardian. Dogs which are used to Leopard-hunting never attack the
animal, though they are rendered furious by the sound of its voice.
They dash at it as if they meant to devour it, but take very good
care to keep out of reach of its terrible paws. By continually
keeping the animal at bay, they give time for their master to come
up, and generally contrive to drive it into a tree, where it can be
shot.
But instances have been known where the Leopard has taken advantage
of the dogs, and carried them off in a very cunning manner. It
hides itself tolerably near the fold, and then begins to growl in a
low voice. The dogs think that they hear a Leopard at a distance,
and dash towards the sound with furious barks and yells. In so
doing, they are sure to pass by the hiding-place of the Leopard,
which springs upon them unawares, knocks one of them over, and
bounds away to its den in the woods. It does not content itself
with taking sheep or goats from the fold, but is also a terrible
despoiler of the hen-roosts, destroying great numbers in a single
night when once it contrives to find its way into the house.
[Illustration: THE LEOPARD LEAPS UPON HIS PREY.]
As an instance of the cunning which seems innate in the Leopard, I
may mention that whenever it takes up its abode near a village, it
does not meddle with the flocks and herds of its neighbours, but
prefers to go to some other village at a distance for food, thus
remaining unsuspected almost at the very doors of the houses.
In general, it does not willingly attack mankind, and at all events
seems rather to fear the presence of a full-grown man. But, when
wounded or irritated, all sense of fear is lost in an overpowering
rush of fury, and it then becomes as terrible a foe as the lion
himself. It is not so large nor so strong, but it is more agile
and quicker in its movements; and when it is seized with one of
these paroxysms of anger, the eye can scarcely follow it as it
darts here and there, striking with lightning rapidity, and dashing
at any foe within reach. Its whole shape seems to be transformed,
and absolutely to swell with anger; its eyes flash with fiery
lustre, its ears are thrown back on the head, and it continually
utters alternate snarls and yells of rage. It is hardly possible
to recognise the graceful, lithe glossy creature, whose walk is
so noiseless, and whose every movement is so easy, in the furious
passion-swollen animal that flies at every foe with blind fury, and
pours out sounds so fierce and menacing that few men, however well
armed, will care to face it.
As is the case with most of the cat tribe, the Leopard is an
excellent climber, and can ascend trees and traverse their boughs
without the least difficulty. It is so fond of trees, that it is
seldom to be seen except in a well-wooded district. Its favourite
residence is a forest where there is plenty of underwood, at least
six or seven feet in height, among which trees are sparingly
interspersed. When crouched in this cover it is practically
invisible, even though its body may be within arm's length of
a passenger. The spotted body harmonizes so perfectly with the
broken lights and deep shadows of the foliage that even a practised
hunter will not enter a covert in search of a Leopard unless he
is accompanied by dogs. The instinct which teaches the Leopard to
choose such localities is truly wonderful, and may be compared with
that of the tiger, which cares little for underwood, but haunts the
grass jungles, where the long, narrow blades harmonize with the
stripes which decorate its body.
[Illustration: WAITING.]
The skin of the Leopard has always been highly valued on account
of its beauty, and in Africa, at the present day, a robe made of
its spotted skin is as much an adjunct of royalty as is the ermine
the emblem of judicial dignity in England. In more ancient times, a
leopard skin was the official costume of a priest, the skin being
sometimes shaped into a garment, and sometimes thrown over the
shoulders and the paws crossed over the breast.
Such is a general history of the Leopard. We will now proceed to
the various passages in which it is mentioned, beginning with its
outward aspect.
In the first place, the Hebrew word Namer signifies "spotted," and
is given to the animal in allusion to its colours. The reader will
now see how forcible is the lament of Jeremiah, "Can the Ethiopian
change his skin, or the Leopard his spots?" Literally, "Can the
Ethiopian change his skin, or the spotted one his spots?"
The agility and swiftness of the Leopard are alluded to in the
prediction by the prophet Habakkuk of the vengeance that would
come upon Israel through the Chaldeans. In chap. i. 5, we read: "I
will work a work in your days, which ye will not believe though it
be told you. For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and
hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth of the land, to
possess the dwelling-places that are not theirs. They are terrible
and dreadful; their judgment and their dignity shall proceed of
themselves. Their horses also are swifter than the Leopards, and are
more fierce than the evening wolves."
The craftiness of the Leopard, and the manner in which it lies in
wait for its prey, are alluded to in more than one passage of Holy
Writ. Hosea the prophet alludes to the Leopard in a few simple
words which display an intimate acquaintance with the habits of this
formidable animal, and in this part of his prophecies he displays
that peculiar local tone which distinguishes his writings. Speaking
of the Israelites under the metaphor of a flock, or a herd, he
proceeds to say: "According to their pasture so were they filled;
they were filled, and their heart was exalted; therefore have they
forgotten me. Therefore I will be unto them as a lion, as a Leopard
by the way will I observe them." The reader will note the peculiar
force of this sentence, whereby God signifies that He will destroy
them openly, as a lion rushes on its prey, and that he will chastise
them unexpectedly, as if it were a Leopard crouching by the wayside,
and watching for the flock to pass, that it may spring on its prey
unexpectedly. The same habit of the Leopard is also alluded to by
Jeremiah, who employs precisely the same imagery as is used by
Habakkuk. See Jer. v. 5, 6, "These have altogether broken the yoke,
and burst the bonds. Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay
them, and a wolf of the evenings shall spoil them, a leopard shall
watch over their cities." It is evident from the employment of this
image by two prophets, the one being nearly a hundred years before
the other, that the crafty, insidious habits of the Leopard were
well known in Palestine, and that the metaphor would tell with full
force among those to whom it was addressed.
[Illustration: leopard]
[Illustration: cats]
THE CAT.
The Cat never mentioned by name in the canonical Scriptures,
and only once in the Apocrypha--The Cat domesticated among the
Egyptians, and trained in bird-catching--Neglected capabilities
of the Cat--Anecdote of an English Cat that caught fish for her
master--Presumed reason why the Scriptures are silent about the
Cat--The Cat mentioned by Baruch.
It is a very remarkable circumstance that the word CAT is not once
mentioned in the whole of the canonical Scriptures, and only once in
the Apocrypha.
The Egyptians, as is well known, kept Cats domesticated in their
houses, a fact which is mentioned by Herodotus, in his second book,
and the 66th and 67th chapters. After describing the various animals
which were kept and fed by this nation, he proceeds to narrate the
habits of the Cat, and writes as follows: "When a fire takes place,
a supernatural impulse seizes the cats. For the Egyptians, standing
at a distance, take care of the cats and neglect to quench the fire;
but the cats make their escape, and leaping over the men, cast
themselves into the fire, and when this occurs, great lamentations
are made among the Egyptians. In whatever house a cat dies of
a natural death, all the family shave their eyebrows. All cats
that die are carried to certain sacred houses, where, after being
embalmed, they are buried in the city of Bubastis."
Now, as many of those cat-mummies have been discovered in good
preservation, the species has been identified with the Egyptian
Cat of the present day, which is scientifically termed _Felis
maniculatus_. Not only did the Egyptians keep Cats at their houses,
but, as is shown by certain sculptures, took the animals with them
when they went bird-catching, and employed them in securing their
prey. Some persons have doubted this statement, saying, that in the
first place, the Cat is not possessed of sufficient intelligence
for the purpose; and that in the second place, as the hunter is
represented as catching wild fowl, the Cat would not be able to
assist him, because it would not enter the water. Neither objection
is valid, nor would have been made by a naturalist.
There are no grounds whatever for assuming that the Cat has not
sufficient intelligence to aid its master in hunting. On the
contrary, there are many familiar instances where the animal has
been trained, even in this country, to catch birds and other game,
and bring its prey home. By nature the Cat is an accomplished
hunter, and, like other animals of the same disposition, can be
taught to use its powers for mankind. We all know that the chetah,
a member of the same tribe, is in constant use at the present day,
and we learn from ancient sculptures that the lion was employed for
the same purpose. Passing from land to water, mankind has succeeded
in teaching the seal and the otter to plunge into the water, catch
their finny prey, and deliver it to their owners. Among predaceous
birds, we have trained the eagle, the falcon, and various hawks,
to assist us in hunting the finned and feathered tribes, while we
have succeeded in teaching the cormorant to catch fish for its
master, and not for itself. Why, then, should the Cat be excepted
from a rule so general? The fact is, the Cat has been, although
domesticated for so many centuries, a comparatively neglected
animal; and it is the fashion to heap upon it the contumacious
epithets of sullen, treacherous, selfish, spiteful, and intractable,
just as we take as our emblems of stupidity the ass and the goose,
which are really among the most cunning of the lower animals. We
have never tried to teach the Cat the art of hunting for her owners,
but that is no reason for asserting that the animal could not be
taught.
As to entering the water, every one who is familiar with the habits
of the Cat knows perfectly well that the Cat will voluntarily enter
water in chase of prey. A Cat does not like to wet her feet, and
will not enter the water without a very powerful reason, but when
that motive is supplied, she has no hesitation about it. A curious
and valuable confirmation of this fact appeared some time ago in
"The Field" newspaper, in which was recorded the history of an
old fisherman, whose Cat invariably went to sea with him, and as
invariably used to leap overboard, seize fish in her mouth, and
bring them to the side of the boat, where her kindly owner could
lift her out, together with the captured fish.
The Cat, then, having been the favoured companion of the Egyptians,
among whom the Israelites lived while they multiplied from a family
into a nation, it does seem very remarkable that the sacred writers
should not even mention it. There is no prohibition of the animal,
even indirectly, in the Mosaic law; but it may be the case that the
Israelites repudiated the Cat simply because it was so favoured by
their former masters.
[Illustration: cat]
THE DOG.
Antipathy displayed by Orientals towards the Dog, and
manifested throughout the Scriptures--Contrast between European
and Oriental Dogs--Habits of the Dogs of Palestine--The
City Dogs and their singular organization--The herdsman's
Dog--Various passages of Scripture--Dogs and the crumbs--their
numbers--Signor Pierotti's experience of the Dogs--Possibility
of their perfect domestication--The peculiar humiliation of
Lazarus--Voracity of the Wild Dogs--The fate of Ahab and
Jezebel--Anecdote of a volunteer Watch-dog--Innate affection of
the Dog towards mankind--Peculiar local Instinct of the Oriental
Dog--Albert Smith's account of the Dogs at Constantinople--The
Dervish and his Dogs--The Greyhound--Uncertainty of the word.
Scarcely changed by the lapse of centuries, the Oriental of the
present day retains most of the peculiarities which distinguished
him throughout the long series of years during which the books
of sacred Scripture were given to the world. In many of these
characteristics he differs essentially from Europeans of the present
day, and exhibits a tone of mind which seems to be not merely owing
to education, but to be innate and inherent in the race.
One of these remarkable characteristics is the strange loathing
with which he regards the Dog. In all other parts of the world, the
Dog is one of the most cherished and valued of animals, but among
those people whom we popularly class under the name of Orientals,
the Dog is detested and despised. As the sacred books were given
to the world through the mediumship of Orientals, we find that
this feeling towards the Dog is manifested whenever the animal is
mentioned; and whether we turn to the books of the Law, the splendid
poetry of the Psalms and the book of Job, the prophetical or the
historical portions of the Old Testament, we find the name of the
Dog repeatedly mentioned; and in every case in connexion with some
repulsive idea. If we turn from the Old to the New Testament, we
find the same idea manifested, whether in the Gospels, the Epistles,
or the Revelation.
To the mind of the true Oriental the very name of the Dog carries
with it an idea of something utterly repugnant to his nature,
and he does not particularly like even the thought of the animal
coming across his mind. And this is the more extraordinary, because
at the commencement and termination of their history the Dog was
esteemed by their masters. The Egyptians, under whose rule they
grew to be a nation, knew the value of the Dog, and showed their
appreciation in the many works of art which have survived to our
time. Then the Romans, under whose iron grasp the last vestiges of
nationality crumbled away, honoured and respected the Dog, made it
their companion, and introduced its portrait into their houses. But,
true to their early traditions, the Jews of the East have ever held
the Dog in the same abhorrence as is manifested by their present
masters, the followers of Mahommed.
Owing to the prevalence of this feeling, the Dogs of Oriental
towns are so unlike their more fortunate European relatives, that
they can hardly be recognised as belonging to the same species.
In those lands the traveller finds that there is none of the
wonderful variety which so distinguishes the Dog of Europe. There
he will never see the bluff, sturdy, surly, faithful mastiff, the
slight gazelle-like greyhound, the sharp, intelligent terrier, the
silent, courageous bulldog, the deep-voiced, tawny bloodhound, the
noble Newfoundland, the clever, vivacious poodle, or the gentle,
silken-haired spaniel.
As he traverses the streets, he finds that all the dogs are alike,
and that all are gaunt, hungry, half starved, savage, and cowardly,
more like wolves than dogs, and quite as ready as wolves to attack
when they fancy they can do so with safety. They prowl about the
streets in great numbers, living, as they best can, on any scraps of
food that they may happen to find. They have no particular masters,
and no particular homes. Charitable persons will sometimes feed
them, but will never make companions of them, feeling that the very
contact of a dog would be a pollution. They are certainly useful
animals, because they act as scavengers, and will eat almost any
animal substance that comes in their way.
The strangest part of their character is the organization which
prevails among them. By some extraordinary means they divide the
town into districts, and not one dog ever ventures out of that
particular district to which it is attached. The boundaries,
although invisible, are as effectual as the loftiest walls, and not
even the daintiest morsel will tempt a dog to pass the mysterious
line which forms the boundary of his district. Generally, these
bands of dogs are so savage that any one who is obliged to walk in a
district where the dogs do not know him is forced to carry a stout
stick for his protection. Like their European relatives, they have
great dislike towards persons who are dressed after a fashion to
which they are unaccustomed, and therefore are sure to harass any
one who comes from Europe and wears the costume of his own country.
As is customary among animals which unite themselves in troops, each
band is under the command of a single leader, whose position is
recognised and his authority acknowledged by all the members.
[Illustration: DOGS IN AN EASTERN CITY AT NIGHT.]
These peculiarities are to be seen almost exclusively in the
dogs which run wild about the towns, because there is abundant
evidence in the Scriptures that the animal was used in a partially
domesticated state, certainly for the protection of their herds,
and possibly for the guardianship of their houses. That the Dog was
employed for the first of these purposes is shown in Job xxx. i:
"But now they that are younger than I have me in derision, whose
fathers I would have disdained to have set with the dogs of my
flock." And that the animal was used for the protection of houses is
thought by some commentators to be shown by the well-known passage
in Is. lvi. 10: "His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they
are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving
to slumber." Still, it is very probable that in this passage the
reference is not made to houses, but to the flocks and herds which
these watchmen ought to have guarded.
The rooted dislike and contempt felt by the Israelites towards
the Dog is seen in numerous passages. Even in that sentence from
Job which has just been quoted, wherein the writer passionately
deplores the low condition into which he has fallen, and contrasts
it with his former high estate, he complains that he is despised by
those whose fathers he held even in less esteem than the dogs which
guarded his herds. There are several references to the Dog in the
books of Samuel, in all of which the name of the animal is mentioned
contemptuously. For example, when David accepted the challenge of
Goliath, and went to meet his gigantic enemy without the ordinary
protection of mail, and armed only with a sling and his shepherd's
staff Goliath said to him, "Am I a dog, that thou comest to me with
staves?" (1 Sam. xvii. 43.) And in the same book, chapter xxiv. 14,
David remonstrates with Saul for pursuing so insignificant a person
as himself, and said, "After whom is the King of Israel come out?
after a dead dog, after a flea."
[Illustration: SHIMEI EXULTING OVER KING DAVID.]
The same metaphor is recorded in the second book of the same writer.
Once it was employed by Mephibosheth, the lame son of Jonathan, when
extolling the generosity of David, then King of Israel in the place
of his grandfather Saul: "And he bowed himself, and said, 'What
is thy servant, that thou shouldest look upon such a dead dog as
I am?'" (2 Sam. ix. 8.) In the same book, chapter xvi. 9, Abishai
applies this contemptuous epithet to Shimei, who was exulting over
the troubled monarch with all the insolence of a cowardly nature,
"Why should this dead dog curse my lord the king?" Abner also makes
use of a similar expression, "Am I a dog's head?" And we may also
refer to the familiar passage in 2 Kings viii. 13, Elisha had
prophesied to Hazael that he would become king on the death of
Ben-hadad, and that he would work terrible mischief in the land.
Horrified at these predictions, or at all events pretending to be
so, he replied, "But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do
this great thing?"
If we turn from the Old to the New Testament, we find the same
contemptuous feeling displayed towards the Dog. It is mentioned as
an intolerable aggravation of the sufferings endured by Lazarus the
beggar as he lay at the rich man's gate, that the dogs came and
licked his sores. In several passages, the word Dog is employed as
a metaphor for scoffers, or unclean persons, or sometimes for those
who did not belong to the Church, whether Jewish or Christian. In
the Sermon on the Mount our Lord himself uses this image, "Give not
that which is holy unto dogs" (Matt. vii. 6.) In the same book,
chapter xv. 26, Jesus employs the same metaphor when speaking to
the Canaanitish woman who had come to ask him to heal her daughter:
"It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to dogs."
And that she understood the meaning of the words is evident from
her answer, in which faith and humility are so admirably blended.
Both St. Paul and St. John employ the word Dog in the same sense.
In his epistle to the Philippians, chapter iii. 2, St. Paul writes,
"Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers." And in the Revelation,
chapter xxii. 14, these words occur: "Blessed are they that do his
commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may
enter in through the gates to the city; for without are dogs, and
sorcerers, ... and murderers, and idolaters, and whomsoever loveth
and maketh a lie."
That the dogs of ancient times formed themselves into bands just as
they do at present is evident from many passages of Scripture, among
which may be mentioned those sentences from the Psalms, wherein
David is comparing the assaults of his enemies to the attacks of the
dogs which infested the city. "Thou hast brought me into the dust
of death; for dogs have compassed me, the assembly of the wicked
have enclosed me." This passage will be better appreciated when
the reader has perused the following extract from a recent work
by Signor Pierotti. After giving a general account of the Dogs of
Palestine and their customs, he proceeds as follows:--
"In Jerusalem, and in the other towns, the dogs have an organization
of their own. They are divided into families and districts,
especially in the night time, and no one of them ventures to quit
his proper quarter; for if he does, he is immediately attacked by
all the denizens of that into which he intrudes, and is driven
back, with several bites as a reminder. Therefore, when an European
is walking through Jerusalem by night, he is always followed by a
number of canine attendants, and greeted at every step with growls
and howls. These tokens of dislike, however, are not intended for
him, but for his followers, who are availing themselves of his
escort to pass unmolested from one quarter to another.
"During a very hard winter, I fed many of the dogs who frequented
the road which I traversed almost every evening, and afterwards,
each time that I passed, I received the homage not only of the
individuals, but of the whole band to which they belonged, for they
accompanied me to the limits of their respective jurisdictions and
were ready to follow me to my own house, if I did but give them a
sign of encouragement, coming at my beck from any distance. They
even recollected the signal two years afterwards, though it was but
little that I had given them."
The account which this experienced writer gives of the animal
presents a singular mixture of repulsive and pleasing traits,
the latter being attributable to the true nature of the Dog, and
the former to the utter neglect with which it is treated. He
remarks that the dogs which run wild in the cities of Palestine
are ill-favoured, ill-scented, and ill-conditioned beasts, more
like jackals or wolves than dogs, and covered with scars, which
betoken their quarrelsome nature. Yet, the same animals lose their
wild, savage disposition, as soon as any human being endeavours
to establish that relationship which was evidently intended to
exist between man and the dog. How readily even these despised and
neglected animals respond to the slightest advance, has been already
shown by Sig. Pierotti's experience, and there is no doubt that
these tawny, short-haired, wolf-like animals, could be trained as
perfectly as their more favoured brethren of the western world.
As in the olden times, so at the present day, the dogs lie about
in the streets, dependent for their livelihood upon the offal that
is flung into the roads, or upon the chance morsels that may be
thrown to them. An allusion to this custom is made in the well-known
passage in Matt. xv. The reader will remember the circumstance
that a woman of Canaan, and therefore not an Israelite, came to
Jesus, and begged him to heal her daughter, who was vexed with a
devil. Then, to try her faith, He said, "It is not meet to take the
children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." And she said, "Truth,
Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's
table." Now, the "crumbs" which are here mentioned are the broken
pieces of bread which were used at table, much as bread is sometimes
used in eating fish. The form of the "loaves" being flat, and much
like that of the oat-cake of this country, adapted them well to the
purpose. The same use of broken bread is alluded to in the parable
of Lazarus, who desired to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the
rich man's table, _i. e._ to partake of the same food as the dogs
which swarmed round him and licked his sores.
[Illustration: LAZARUS LYING AT THE RICH MAN'S DOOR.]
[Illustration: THE DEATH OF JEZEBEL.]
The "crumbs," however liberally distributed, would not nearly
suffice for the subsistence of the canine armies, and their chief
support consists of the offal, which is rather too plentifully
flung into the streets. If the body of any animal, not excluding
their own kind, be found lying in the streets, the dogs will
assemble round it, and tear it to pieces, and they have no scruples
even in devouring a human body. Of course, owing to the peculiar
feeling entertained by the Orientals towards the Dog, no fate can
be imagined more repulsive to the feelings of humanity than to be
eaten by dogs; and therein lies the terror of the fate which was
prophesied of Ahab and Jezebel. Moreover, the blood, even of the
lower animals, was held in great sanctity, and it was in those days
hardly possible to invoke a more dreadful fate upon any one than
that his blood should be lapped by dogs.
We lose much of the real force of the Scriptures, if we do not
possess some notion of the manners and customs of Palestine and the
neighbouring countries, as well as of the tone of mind prevalent
among the inhabitants. In our own country, that any one should be
eaten by dogs would be a fate so contrary to usage, that we can
hardly conceive its possibility, and such a fate would be out of
the ordinary course of events. But, if such a fate should happen to
befall any one, we should have no stronger feeling of pity than the
natural regret that the dead person was not buried with Christian
rites.
But, with the inhabitants of Palestine, such an event was by no
means unlikely. It was, and is still, the custom to bury the corpse
almost as soon as life has departed, and such would ordinarily have
been the case with the dead body of Jezebel. But, through fear of
the merciless Jehu, by whose command she had been flung from the
window of her own palace, no one dared to remove her mangled body.
The dogs, therefore, seized upon their prey; and, even before Jehu
had risen from the banquet with which he celebrated his deed,
nothing was left of the body but the skull, the feet, and the hands.
[Illustration: SYRIAN DOG.]
In Mr. Tristram's work, the author has recognised the true dog
nature, though concealed behind an uninviting form: "Our watch-dog,
Beirût, attached himself instinctively to Wilhelm, though his canine
instinct soon taught him to recognise every one of our party of
fourteen, and to cling to the tents, whether in motion or at rest,
as his home. Poor Beirût! though the veriest pariah in appearance,
thy plebeian form encased as noble a dog-heart as ever beat at the
sound of a stealthy step."
The same author records a very remarkable example of the sagacity of
the native Dog, and the fidelity with which it will keep guard over
the property of its master. "The guard-house provided us, unasked,
with an invaluable and vigilant sentry, who was never relieved, nor
ever quitted the post of duty. The poor Turkish conscript, like
every other soldier in the world, is fond of pets, and in front of
the grim turret that served for a guard-house was a collection of
old orange-boxes and crates, thickly peopled with a garrison of
dogs of low degree, whose attachment to the spot was certainly not
purchased by the loaves and fishes which fell to their lot.
"One of the family must indeed have had hard times, for she had a
family of no less than five dependent on her exertions, and on the
superfluities of the sentries' mess. With a sagacity almost more
than canine, the poor gaunt creature had scarcely seen our tents
pitched before she came over with all her litter and deposited
them in front of our tent. At once she scanned the features of
every member of the encampment, and introduced herself to our
notice. During the week of our stay, she never quitted her post,
or attempted any depredation on our kitchen-tent, which might have
led to her banishment. Night and day she proved a faithful and
vigilant sentry, permitting no stranger, human or canine, European
or Oriental, to approach the tents without permission, but keeping
on the most familiar terms with ourselves and our servants.
"On the morning of our departure, no sooner had she seen our camp
struck, than she conveyed her puppies back to their old quarters
in the orange-box, and no entreaties or bribes could induce her to
accompany us. On three subsequent visits to Jerusalem, the same
dog acted in a similar way, though no longer embarrassed by family
cares, and would on no account permit any strange dog, nor even her
companions at the guard-house, to approach within the tent ropes."
After perusing this account of the Dog of Palestine, two points
strike the reader. The first is the manner in which the Dog, in
spite of all the social disadvantages under which it labours,
displays one of the chief characteristics of canine nature, namely,
the yearning after human society. The animal in question had already
attached herself to the guard-house, where she could meet with some
sort of human converse, though the inborn prejudices of the Moslem
would prevent the soldiers from inviting her to associate with them,
as would certainly have been done by European soldiers. She nestled
undisturbed in the orange-box, and, safe under the protection of the
guard, brought up her young family in their immediate neighbourhood.
But, as soon as Europeans arrived, her instinct told her that they
would be closer associates than the Turkish soldiers who were
quartered in the guard-house, and accordingly she removed herself
and her family to the shelter of their tents.
Herein she carried out the leading principle of a dog's nature. A
dog _must_ have a master, or at all events a mistress, and just in
proportion as he is free from human control, does he become less
dog-like and more wolf-like. In fact, familiar intercourse with
mankind is an essential part of a dog's true character, and the
animal seems to be so well aware of this fact, that he will always
contrive to find a master of some sort, and will endure a life of
cruel treatment at the hands of a brutal owner rather than have no
master at all.
The second point in this account is the singular local instinct
which characterises the Dogs of Palestine and other eastern
countries, and which is as much inbred in them as the faculty of
marking game in the pointer, the combative nature in the bulldog,
the exquisite scent in the bloodhound, and the love of water in
the Newfoundland dog. In this country, we fancy that the love of
locality belongs especially to the cat, and that the Dog cares
little for place, and much for man. But, in this case, we find that
the local instinct overpowered the yearning for human society. Fond
as was this dog of her newly-found friends, and faithful as she was
in her self-imposed service, she would not follow them away from the
spot where she had been born, and where she had produced her own
young.
This curious love for locality has evidently been derived from the
traditional custom of successive generations, which has passed from
the realm of reason into that of instinct. The reader will remember
that Sig. Pierotti mentions an instance where the dogs which he had
been accustomed to feed would follow him as far as the limits of
their particular district, but would go no farther. The late Albert
Smith, in his "Month at Constantinople," gives a similar example of
this characteristic. He first describes the general habits of the
dogs.
On the first night of his arrival, he could not sleep, and went
to the window to look out in the night. "The noise I heard then I
shall never forget. To say that if all the sheep-dogs, in going to
Smithfield on a market-day, had been kept on the constant bark,
and pitted against the yelping curs upon all the carts in London,
they could have given any idea of the canine uproar that now first
astonished me, would be to make the feeblest of images. The whole
city rang with one vast riot. Down below me, at Tophané--over-about
Stamboul--far away at Scutari--the whole sixty thousand dogs that
are said to overrun Constantinople appeared engaged in the most
active extermination of each other, without a moment's cessation.
The yelping, howling, barking, growling, and snarling, were all
merged into one uniform and continuous even sound, as the noise of
frogs becomes when heard at a distance. For hours there was no lull.
I went to sleep, and woke again, and still, with my windows open,
I heard the same tumult going on; nor was it until daybreak that
anything like tranquillity was restored.
"Going out in the daytime, it is not difficult to find traces of the
fights of the night about the limbs of all the street dogs. There
is not one, among their vast number, in the possession of a perfect
skin. Some have their ears gnawed away or pulled off; others have
their eyes taken out; from the backs and haunches of others perfect
steaks of flesh had been torn away; and all bear the scars of
desperate combats.
"Wild and desperate as is their nature, these poor animals are
susceptible of kindness. If a scrap of bread is thrown to one of
them now and then, he does not forget it; for they have, at times,
a hard matter to live--not the dogs amongst the shops of Galata or
Stamboul, but those whose 'parish' lies in the large burying-grounds
and desert places without the city; for each keeps, or rather is
kept, to his district, and if he chanced to venture into a strange
one, the odds against his return would be very large. One battered
old animal, to whom I used occasionally to toss a scrap of food,
always followed me from the hotel to the cross street in Pera,
where the two soldiers stood on guard, but would never come beyond
this point. He knew the fate that awaited him had he done so; and
therefore, when I left him, he would lie down in the road, and go to
sleep until I came back.
"When a horse or camel dies, and is left about the roads near the
city, the bones are soon picked very clean by these dogs, and they
will carry the skulls or pelves to great distances. I was told that
they will eat their dead fellows--a curious fact, I believe, in
canine economy. They are always troublesome, not to say dangerous,
at night; and are especially irritated by Europeans, whom they will
single out amongst a crowd of Levantines."
In the same work there is a short description of a solitary dervish,
who had made his home in the hollow of a large plane-tree, in front
of which he sat, surrounded by a small fence of stakes only a foot
or so in height. Around him, but not venturing within the fence,
were a number of gaunt, half-starved dogs, who prowled about him
in hopes of having an occasional morsel of food thrown to them.
Solitary as he was, and scanty as must have been the nourishment
which he could afford to them, the innate trustfulness of the
dog-nature induced them to attach themselves to human society of
some sort, though their master was one, and they were many--he was
poor, and they were hungry.
[Illustration: EASTERN WATER-SELLER.]
THE WOLF.
Identity of the animal indisputable--its numbers, past and
present--The Wolf never mentioned directly--its general
habits--References in Scripture--its mingled ferocity and
cowardice--its association into packs--The Wolf's bite--How it
takes its prey--its ravages among the flocks--Allusions to this
habit--The shepherd and his nightly enemies--Mr. Tristram and
the Wolf--A semi-tamed Wolf at Marsaba.
There is no doubt that the Hebrew word _Zeëb_, which occurs in a
few passages of the Old Testament, is rightly translated as WOLF,
and signifies the same animal as is frequently mentioned in the New
Testament.
This fierce and dangerous animal was formerly very plentiful in
Palestine, but is now much less common, owing to the same causes
which have extirpated the lion from the country. It is a rather
remarkable fact, that in no passage of Holy Writ is the Wolf
directly mentioned. Its name is used as a symbol of a fierce and
treacherous enemy, but neither in the Old nor New Testament does
any sacred writer mention any act as performed by the Wolf. We have
already heard of the lion which attacked Samson and was killed by
him, of the lion which slew the disobedient prophet, and of the
lions which spared Daniel when thrown into their den. We also read
of the dogs which licked Ahab's blood, and ate the body of Jezebel,
also of the bears which tore the mocking children.
But in no case is the Wolf mentioned, except in a metaphorical
sense; and this fact is the more remarkable, because the animals
were so numerous that they were very likely to have exercised some
influence on a history extending over such a lengthened range of
years, and limited to so small a portion of the earth. Yet we never
hear of the Wolf attacking any of the personages mentioned in
Scripture; and although we are told of the exploit of David, who
pursued a lion and a bear that had taken a lamb out of his fold, we
are never told of any similar deed in connexion with the Wolf.
[Illustration: WOLVES ATTACKING A FLOCK OF SHEEP.]
This animal was then what it is now. Seldom seen by day, it lies
hidden in its covert as long as the light lasts, and steals out in
search of prey in the evening. This custom of the Wolf is mentioned
in several passages of Holy Scripture, such as that in Jer. v. 5,
6: "These have altogether broken the yoke, and burst the bonds.
Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of
the evenings shall spoil them." In this passage the reader will
see that the rebellious Israelites are compared to restive draught
cattle which have broken away from their harness and run loose,
so that they are deprived of the protection of their owners, and
exposed to the fury of wild beasts. A similar reference is made in
Hab. i. 8: "Their horses also are swifter than the leopards, and are
more fierce than the evening wolves." The same habit of the Wolf is
alluded to in Zeph. iii. 3: "Her princes within her are roaring
lions; her judges are evening wolves."
Individually, the Wolf is rather a timid animal. It will avoid a man
rather than meet him. It prefers to steal upon its prey and take
it unawares, rather than to seize it openly and boldly. It is ever
suspicious of treachery, and is always imagining that a trap is laid
for it. Even the shallow device of a few yards of rope trailing
from any object, or a strip of cloth fluttering in the breeze, is
quite sufficient to keep the Wolf at bay for a considerable time.
This fact is well known to hunters, who are accustomed to secure the
body of a slain deer by simply tying a strip of cloth to its horn.
If taken in a trap of any kind, or even if it fancies itself in an
enclosure from which it can find no egress, it loses all courage,
and will submit to be killed without offering the least resistance.
It will occasionally endeavour to effect its escape by feigning
death, and has more than once been known to succeed in this device.
But, collectively, the Wolf is one of the most dangerous animals
that can be found. Herding together in droves when pressed by
hunger, the wolves will openly hunt prey, performing this task as
perfectly as a pack of trained hounds. Full of wiles themselves,
they are craftily wise in anticipating the wiles of the animals
which they pursue; and even in full chase, while the body of the
pack is following on the footsteps of the flying animal, one or two
are detached on the flanks, so as to cut it off if it should attempt
to escape by doubling on its pursuers.
There is no animal which a herd of wolves will not attack, and very
few which they will not ultimately secure. Strength avails nothing
against the numbers of these savage foes, which give no moment of
rest, but incessantly assail their antagonist, dashing by instinct
at those parts of the body which can be least protected, and
lacerating with their peculiar short, snapping bite. Should several
of their number be killed or disabled, it makes no difference to
the wolves, except that a minute or two are wasted in devouring
their slain or wounded brethren, and they only return to the attack
the more excited by the taste of blood. Swiftness of foot avails
nothing against the tireless perseverance of the wolves, who press
on in their peculiar, long, slinging gallop, and in the end are sure
to tire out the swifter footed but less enduring animal that flees
before them. The stately buffalo is conquered by the ceaseless
assaults of the wolves; the bear has been forced to succumb to them,
and the fleet-footed stag finds his swift limbs powerless to escape
the pursuing band, and his branching horns unable to resist their
furious onset when once they overtake him.
[Illustration: WOLVES CHASING DEER.]
That the Wolf is a special enemy to the sheep-fold is shown in
many parts of the Scriptures, both in the Old and New Testaments,
especially in the latter. In John x. 1-16, Jesus compares himself
to a good shepherd, who watches over the fold, and, if the wolves
should come to take the sheep, would rather give up His life than
they should succeed. But the false teachers are compared to bad
shepherds, hired for money, but having no interest in the sheep, and
who therefore will not expose themselves to danger in defence of
their charge.
This metaphor was far more effective in Palestine, and at that time,
than it is in this country and at the present day. In this land,
the shepherd has no anxiety about the inroads of wild beasts, but
in Palestine one of his chief cares was to keep watch at night lest
the wolves should attack the fold, and to drive them away himself in
case they should do so. Therefore the shepherd's life was one which
involved no small danger as well as anxiety, and the metaphor used
by our Lord gains additional force from the knowledge of this fact.
[Illustration: THE WOLF.]
A similar metaphor is used when Jesus wished to express in
forcible terms the dangers to which the chosen seventy would oft
be subjected, and the impossibility that they should be able to
overcome the many perils with which they would be surrounded. "Go
your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves" (Luke x.
3).
Mr. Tristram several times met wolves while he was engaged in his
travels, and mostly saw solitary specimens. One such encounter
took place in the wilderness of Judah: "On my way back, I met a
fine solitary wolf, who watched me very coolly, at the distance of
sixty yards, while I drew my charge and dropped a bullet down the
barrel. Though I sent the ball into a rock between his legs as he
stood looking at me in the wady, he was not sufficiently alarmed to
do more than move on a little more quickly, ever and anon turning
to look at me, while gradually increasing his distance. Darkness
compelled me to desist from the chase, when he quietly turned and
followed me at a respectful distance. He was a magnificent animal,
larger than any European wolf, and of a much lighter colour."
Those who are acquainted with the character of the animal will
appreciate the truthfulness of this description. The cautious
prowl at a distance, the slow trot away when he fancied he might
be attacked, the reverted look, and the final turning back and
following at a respectful distance, are all characteristic traits of
the Wolf, no matter to what species it may belong, nor what country
it may inhabit.
On another occasion, while riding in the open plain of Gennesaret,
the horse leaped over the bank of a little ditch, barely three feet
in depth. After the horse had passed, and not until then, a Wolf
started out of the ditch, literally from under the horses hoofs,
and ran off. The animal had been crouching under the little bank,
evidently watching for some cows and calves which were grazing at
a short distance, under the charge of a Bedouin boy. The same
author mentions that one of the monks belonging to the monastery at
Marsaba had contrived to render a Wolf almost tame. Every evening at
six o'clock the Wolf came regularly across the ravine, ate a piece
of bread, and then went back again. With the peculiar jealousy of
all tamed animals, the Wolf would not suffer any of his companions
to partake of his good fortune. Several of them would sometimes
accompany him, but as soon as they came under the wall of the
monastery he always drove them away.
[Illustration: WOLVES ATTACKING WILD GOATS.]
The inhabitants of Palestine say that the Wolves of that country
hunt singly, or at most in little packs of few in number. Still they
dread the animal exceedingly on account of the damage it inflicts
upon their flocks of sheep and goats.
[Illustration: THE JACKAL.]
THE FOX OR JACKAL.
The two animals comprehended under one name--The Jackal--its
numbers in ancient and modern Palestine--General habits of the
Jackal--Localities where the Jackal is found--Samson, and the
three hundred "foxes"--Popular objections to the narrative--The
required number easily obtained--Signor Pierotti's remarks upon
the Jackal--An unpleasant position--How the fields were set on
fire--The dread of fire inherent in wild beasts--The truth of
the narrative proved--The Fox and Jackal destructive among grapes
There are several passages in the Old Testament in which the word
Fox occurs, and it is almost certain that the Hebrew word _Shuâl_,
which is rendered in our translation as Fox, is used rather loosely,
and refers in some places to the Jackal, and in others to the Fox.
We will first take those passages in which the former rendering of
the word is evidently the right one, and will begin by examining
those characteristics of the animal which afford grounds for such an
assertion.
[Illustration: FOXES OR JACKALS DEVOURING THE CARCASE OF A GOAT.]
Even at the present time, the Jackal is extremely plentiful in
Palestine; and as the numbers of wild beasts have much decreased
in modern days, the animals must have been even more numerous than
they are at present. It is an essentially nocturnal and gregarious
animal. During the whole of the day the Jackals lie concealed in
their holes or hiding-places, which are usually cavities in the
rocks, in tombs, or among ruins. At nightfall they issue from their
dens, and form themselves into packs, often consisting of several
hundred individuals, and prowl about in search of food. Carrion of
various kinds forms their chief subsistence, and they perform in
the country much the same task as is fulfilled by the dogs in the
cities.
If any animal should be killed, or even severely wounded, the
Jackals are sure to find it out and to devour it before the
daybreak. They will scent out the track of the hunter, and feed
upon the offal of the beasts which he has slain. If the body of
a human being were to be left on the ground, the Jackals would
certainly leave but little traces of it; and in the olden times of
warfare, they must have held high revelry in the battle-field after
the armies had retired. It is to this propensity of the Jackal
that David refers--himself a man of war, who had fought on many a
battle-field, and must have seen the carcases of the slain mangled
by these nocturnal prowlers: "Those that seek my soul, to destroy
it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth. They shall fall
by the sword; they shall be a portion for foxes" (Ps. lxiii. 9,
10). Being wild beasts, afraid of man, and too cowardly to attack
him even when rendered furious by hunger, and powerful by force of
numbers, they keep aloof from towns and cities, and live in the
uninhabited parts of the country. Therefore the prophet Jeremiah, in
his Book of Lamentations, makes use of the following forcible image,
when deploring the pitiful state into which Judæa had fallen: "For
this our heart is faint; for these things our eyes are dim: because
of the mountain of Zion, which is desolate, the foxes walk upon it"
(Lam. v. 17). And Ezekiel makes use of a similar image: "O Israel,
thy prophets are like foxes in the desert."
But, by far the most important passage in which the Fox is
mentioned, is that wherein is recorded the grotesque vengeance of
Samson upon the Philistines: "And Samson went and caught three
hundred foxes, and took firebrands, and turned tail to tail, and
put a firebrand in the midst between two tails. And when he had set
the brands on fire, he let them go into the standing com of the
Philistines, and burnt up both the shocks and also the standing
corn, with the vineyards and olives" (Judges xv. 4, 5). Now, as this
is one of the passages of Holy Writ to which great objections have
been taken, it will be as well to examine these objections, and see
whether they have any real force. The first of these objections is,
that the number of foxes is far too great to have been caught at
one time, and to this objection two answers have been given. The
first answer is, that they need not have been caught at once, but
by degrees, and kept until wanted. But the general tenor of the
narrative is undoubtedly in favour of the supposition that this act
of Samson was unpremeditated, and that it was carried into operation
at once, before his anger had cooled. The second answer is, that
the requisite number of Foxes might have been miraculously sent to
Samson for this special purpose. This theory is really so foolish
and utterly untenable, that I only mention it because it has been
put forward. It fails on two grounds: the first being that a miracle
would hardly have been wrought to enable Samson to revenge himself
in so cruel and unjustifiable a manner; and the second, that there
was not the least necessity for any miracle at all.
[Illustration: A FEAST IN PROSPECT.]
If we put out of our minds the idea of the English Fox, an animal
comparatively scarce in this country, and solitary in its habits,
and substitute the extremely plentiful and gregarious Jackal,
wandering in troops by night, and easily decoyed by hunger into a
trap, we shall see that double the number might have been taken,
if needful. Moreover, it is not to be imagined that Samson caught
them all with his own hand. He was at the head of his people, and
had many subordinates at his command, so that a large number of
hunters might have been employed simultaneously in the capture. In
corroboration of this point, I insert an extremely valuable extract
from Signor Pierotti's work, in which he makes reference to this
very portion of the sacred history:--
"It is still very abundant near Gaza, Askalon, Ashdod, Ekron, and
Ramleh. I have frequently met with it during my wanderings by night,
and on one occasion had an excellent opportunity of appreciating
their number and their noise.
"One evening in the month of January, while it was raining a perfect
deluge, I was obliged, owing to the dangerous illness of a friend,
to return from Jerusalem to Jaffa. The depth of snow on the road
over a great part of the mountain, the clayey mud in the plain, and
the darkness of the night, prevented my advancing quickly; so that
about half-past three in the morning I arrived on the bank of a
small torrent, about half an hour's journey to the east of Ramleh. I
wished to cross: my horse at first refused, but, on my spurring it,
advanced and at once sank up to the breast, followed of course by
my legs, thus teaching me to respect the instinct of an Arab horse
for the future.
[Illustration: A FEAST SECURED.]
"There I stuck, without the possibility of escape, and consoled my
horse and myself with some provisions that I had in my saddle-bags,
shouting and singing at intervals, in the hope of obtaining succour,
and of preventing accidents, as I knew that the year before a mule
in the same position had been mistaken for a wild beast, and killed.
The darkness was profound, and the wind very high; but, happily,
it was not cold; for the only things attracted by my calls were
numbers of jackals, who remained at a certain distance from me, and
responded to my cries, especially when I tried to imitate them, as
though they took me for their music-master.
"About five o'clock, one of the guards of the English consulate at
Jerusalem came from Ramleh and discovered my state. He charitably
returned thither, and brought some men, who extricated me and my
horse from our unpleasant bath, which, as may be supposed, was not
beneficial to our legs.
"During this most uncomfortable night, I had good opportunity of
ascertaining that, if another Samson had wished to burn again the
crops in the country of the Philistines, he would have had no
difficulty in finding more than three hundred jackals, and catching
as many as he wanted in springs, traps, or pitfalls. (See Ps. cxl.
5.)"
The reader will now see that there was not the least difficulty in
procuring the requisite number of animals, and that consequently the
first objection to the truth of the story is disposed of.
We will now proceed to the second objection, which is, that if
the animals were tied tail to tail, they would remain on or near
the same spot, because they would pull in different directions,
and that, rather than run about, they would turn round and fight
each other. Now, in the first place, we are nowhere told that the
tails of the foxes, or jackals, were placed in contact with each
other, and it is probable that some little space was left between
them. That animals so tied would not run in a straight line is
evident enough, and this was exactly the effect which Samson
wished to produce. Had they been at liberty, and the fiery brand
fastened to their tails, they would have run straight to their
dens, and produced but little effect. But their captor, with
cruel ingenuity, had foreseen this contingency, and, by the method
of securing them which he adopted, forced them to pursue a devious
course, each animal trying to escape from the dreaded firebrand, and
struggling in vain endeavours to drag its companion towards its own
particular den.
[Illustration: A TRESPASSER.]
All wild animals have an instinctive dread of fire; and there is
none, not even the fierce and courageous lion, that dares enter
within the glare of the bivouac fire. A lion has even been struck
in the face with a burning brand, and has not ventured to attack
the man that wielded so dreadful a weapon. Consequently it may be
imagined that the unfortunate animals that were used by Samson for
his vindictive purpose, must have been filled with terror at the
burning brands which they dragged after them, and the blaze of
the fire which was kindled wherever they went. They would have no
leisure to fight, and would only think of escaping from the dread
and unintelligible enemy which pursued them.
When a prairie takes fire, all the wild inhabitants flee in terror,
and never think of attacking each other, so that the bear, the wolf,
the cougar, the deer, and the wild swine, may all be seen huddled
together, their natural antagonism quelled in the presence of a
common foe. So it must have been with the miserable animals which
were made the unconscious instruments of destruction. That they
would stand still when a burning brand was between them, and when
flames sprang up around them, is absurd. That they would pull in
exactly opposite directions with precisely balanced force is equally
improbable, and it is therefore evident that they would pursue a
devious path, the stronger of the two dragging the weaker, but being
jerked out of a straight course and impeded by the resistance which
it would offer. That they would stand on the same spot and fight has
been shown to be contrary to the custom of animals under similar
circumstances.
Thus it will be seen that every objection not only falls to the
ground, but carries its own refutation, thus vindicating this
episode in sacred history, and showing, that not only were the
circumstances possible, but that they were highly probable. Of
course every one of the wretched animals must have been ultimately
burned to death, after suffering a prolonged torture from the
firebrand that was attached to it. Such a consideration would,
however, have had no effect for deterring Samson from employing
them. The Orientals are never sparing of pain, even when inflicted
upon human beings, and in too many cases they seem utterly unable
even to comprehend the cruelty of which they are guilty. And Samson
was by no means a favourable specimen of his countrymen. He was the
very incarnation of strength, but was as morally weak as he was
corporeally powerful; and to that weakness he owed his fall. Neither
does he seem to possess the least trace of forbearance any more than
of self-control, but he yields to his own undisciplined nature,
places himself, and through him the whole Israelitish nation, in
jeopardy, and then, with a grim humour, scatters destruction on
every side in revenge for the troubles which he has brought upon
himself by his own acts.
THE HYÆNA.
The Hyæna not mentioned by name, but evidently alluded
to--Signification of the word Zabua--Translated in the
Septuagint as Hyæna--A scene described by the prophet
Isaiah--The Hyæna plentiful in Palestine at the present
day--its well-known cowardice and fear of man--The uses of
the Hyæna and the services which it renders--The particular
species of Hyæna--The Hyæna in the burial-grounds--Hunting the
Hyæna--Curious superstition respecting the talismanic properties
of its skin--Precautions adopted in flaying it--Popular legends
of the Hyæna and its magical powers--The cavern home of the
Hyæna--The valley of Zeboim.
Although in our version of the Scriptures the Hyæna is not mentioned
by that name, there are two passages in the Old Testament which
evidently refer to that animal, and therefore it is described in
these pages. If the reader will refer to the prophet Jeremiah, xii.
7-9, he will find these words: "I have forsaken mine house, I have
left mine heritage; I have given the dearly beloved of my soul into
the hand of her enemies. Mine heritage is unto me as a lion in
the forest; it crieth out against me: therefore have I hated it.
Mine heritage is unto me as a speckled bird; the birds round about
are against her: come ye, assemble all the beasts of the field,
come to devour." Now, the word _zabua_ signifies something that
is streaked, and in the Authorized Version it is rendered as a
speckled bird. But in the Septuagint it is rendered as Hyæna, and
this translation is thought by many critical writers to be the true
one. It is certain that the word _zabua_ is one of the four names by
which the Talmudical writers mention the Hyæna, when treating of its
character; and it is equally certain that such a rendering makes the
passage more forcible, and is in perfect accordance with the habits
of predacious animals.
The whole scene which the Prophet thus describes was evidently
familiar to him. First, we have the image of a deserted country,
allowed to be overrun with wild beasts. Then we have the lion,
which has struck down its prey, roaring with exultation, and
defying any adversary to take it from him. Then, the lion having
eaten his fill and gone away, we have the Hyænas, vultures, and
other carrion-eating creatures, assembling around the carcase, and
hastening to devour it. This is a scene which has been witnessed
by many hunters who have pursued their sport in lands where lions,
hyænas, and vultures are found; and all these creatures were
inhabitants of Palestine at the time when Jeremiah wrote.
At the present day, the Hyæna is still plentiful in Palestine,
though in the course of the last few years its numbers have sensibly
diminished. The solitary traveller, when passing by night from one
town to another, often falls in with the Hyæna, but need suffer no
fear, as it will not attack a human being, and prefers to slink out
of his way. But dead, and dying, or wounded animals are the objects
for which it searches; and when it finds them, it devours the whole
of its prey. The lion will strike down an antelope, an ox, or a
goat--will tear off its flesh with its long fangs, and lick the
bones with its rough tongue until they are quite cleaned. The wolves
and jackals will follow the lion, and eat every soft portion of the
dead animal, while the vultures will fight with them for the coveted
morsels. But the Hyæna is a more accomplished scavenger than lion,
wolf, jackal, or vulture; for it will eat the very bones themselves,
its tremendously-powerful jaws and firmly-set teeth enabling it to
crush even the leg-bone of an ox, and its unparalleled digestive
powers enabling it to assimilate the sharp and hard fragments which
would kill any creature not constituted like itself.
In a wild, or even a partially-inhabited country, the Hyæna is,
therefore, a most useful animal. It may occasionally kill a crippled
or weakly ox, and sometimes carry off a sheep; but, even in that
case, no very great harm is done, for it does not meddle with any
animal that can resist. But these few delinquencies are more than
compensated by the great services which it renders as scavenger,
consuming those substances which even the lion cannot eat, and thus
acting as a scavenger in removing objects which would be offensive
to sight and injurious to health.
[Illustration: LEOPARD ROBBED OF ITS PREY BY HYÆNAS.]
The species which is mentioned in the Scriptures is the Striped
Hyæna (_Hyæna striata_); but the habits of all the species are
almost exactly similar. We are told by travellers of certain towns
in different parts of Africa which would be unendurable but for the
Hyænas. With the disregard for human life which prevails throughout
all savage portions of that country, the rulers of these towns order
executions almost daily, the bodies of the victims being allowed
to lie where they happened to fall. No one chooses to touch them,
lest they should also be added to the list of victims, and the
decomposing bodies would soon cause a pestilence but for the Hyænas,
who assemble at night round the bodies, and by the next morning have
left scarcely a trace of the murdered men.
Even in Palestine, and in the present day, the Hyæna will endeavour
to rifle the grave, and to drag out the interred corpse. The bodies
of the rich are buried in rocky caves, whose entrances are closed
with heavy stones, which the Hyæna cannot move; but those of the
poor, which are buried in the ground, must be defended by stones
heaped over them. Even when this precaution is taken, the Hyæna will
sometimes find out a weak spot, drag out the body, and devour it.
In consequence of this propensity, the inhabitants have an utter
detestation of the animal. They catch it whenever they can, in
pitfalls or snares, using precisely the same means as were employed
two thousand years ago; or they hunt it to its den, and then kill
it, stripping off the hide, and carrying it about still wet,
receiving a small sum of money from those to whom they show it.
Afterwards the skin is dressed, by rubbing it with lime and salt,
and steeping it in the waters of the Dead Sea. It is then made into
sandals and leggings, which are thought to be powerful charms, and
to defend the wearer from the Hyæna's bite.
They always observe certain superstitious precautions in flaying the
dead animal. Believing that the scent of the flesh would corrupt the
air, they invariably take the carcase to the leeward of the tents
before they strip off the skin. Even in the animal which has been
kept for years in a cage, and has eaten nothing but fresh meat,
the odour is too powerful to be agreeable, as I can testify from
practical experience when dissecting a Hyæna that had died in the
Zoological Gardens; and it is evident that the scent of an animal
that has lived all its life on carrion must be almost unbearable.
The skin being removed, the carcase is burnt, because the hunters
think that by this process the other Hyænas are prevented from
finding the body of their comrade, and either avenging its death or
taking warning by its fate.
[Illustration: HYÆNAS DEVOURING BONES.]
Superstitions seem to be singularly prevalent concerning the Hyæna.
In Palestine, there is a prevalent idea that if a Hyæna meets a
solitary man at night, it can enchant him in such a manner as to
make him follow it through thickets and over rocks, until he is
quite exhausted, and falls an unresisting prey; but that over two
persons he has no such influence, and therefore a solitary traveller
is gravely advised to call for help as soon as he sees a Hyæna,
because the fascination of the beast would be neutralized by the
presence of a second person. So firmly is this idea rooted in the
minds of the inhabitants, that they will never travel by night,
unless they can find at least one companion in their journey.
In Northern Africa there are many strange superstitions connected
with this animal, one of the most curious of which is founded on
its well-known cowardice. The Arabs fancy that any weapon which
has killed a Hyæna, whether it be gun, sword, spear, or dagger, is
thenceforth unfit to be used in warfare. "Throw away that sword,"
said an Arab to a French officer, who had killed a Hyæna, "it has
slain the Hyæna, and it will be treacherous to you."
At the present day, its numbers are not nearly so great in Palestine
as they used to be, and are decreasing annually. The cause of
this diminution lies, according to Signor Pierotti, more in the
destruction of forests than in the increase of population and the
use of fire-arms, though the two latter causes have undoubtedly
considerable influence.
There is a very interesting account by Mr. Tristram of the haunt of
these animals. While exploring the deserted quarries of Es Sumrah,
between Beth-arabah and Bethel, he came upon a wonderful mass of
hyænine relics. The quarries in which were lying the half-hewn
blocks, scored with the marks of wedges, had evidently formed the
resort of Hyænas for a long series of years. "Vast heaps of bones
of camels, oxen, and sheep had been collected by these animals, in
some places to the depth of two or three feet, and on one spot I
counted the skulls of seven camels. There were no traces whatever of
any human remains. We had here a beautiful recent illustration of
the mode of foundation of the old bone caverns, so valuable to the
geologist. These bones must all have been brought in by the Hyænas,
as no camel or sheep could possibly have entered the caverns alive,
nor could any floods have washed them in. Near the entrance where
the water percolates, they were already forming a soft breccia."
The second allusion to the Hyæna is made in 1 Sam. xiii. 18,
"Another company turned to the way of the border that looketh to the
Valley of Zeboim towards the wilderness," _i.e._ to the Valley of
Hyænas.
The colour of the Striped Hyæna varies according to its age. When
young, as is the case with many creatures, birds as well as mammals,
the stripes from which it derives its name are much more strongly
marked than in the adult specimen. The general hue of the fur is
a pale grey-brown, over which are drawn a number of dark stripes,
extending along the ribs and across the limbs.
In the young animal these stripes are nearly twice as dark and twice
as wide as in the adult, and they likewise appear on the face and
on other parts of the body, whence they afterwards vanish. The fur
is always rough; and along the spine, and especially over the neck
and shoulders, it is developed into a kind of mane, which gives a
very fierce aspect to the animal. The illustration shows a group of
Hyænas coming to feed on the relics of a dead animal. The jackals
and vultures have eaten as much of the flesh as they can manage,
and the vultures are sitting, gorged, round the stripped bones. The
Hyænas are now coming up to play their part as scavengers, and have
already begun to break up the bones in their crushing-mills of jaws.
THE WEASEL.
Difficulty of identifying the Weasel of Scripture--The Weasel of
Palestine--Suggested identity with the Ichneumon.
The word Weasel occurs once in the Holy Scriptures, and therefore it
is necessary that the animal should be mentioned. There is a great
controversy respecting the identification of the animal, inasmuch as
there is nothing in the context which gives the slightest indication
of its appearance or habits.
The passage in question is that which prohibits the Weasel and the
mouse as unclean animals (see Lev. xi. 29). Now the word which is
here translated Weasel is _Choled_, or _Chol'd_; and, I believe,
never occurs again in the whole of the Old Testament. Mr. W.
Houghton conjectures that the Hebrew word Choled is identical with
the Arabic _Chuld_ and the Syriac _Chuldo_, both words signifying a
mole; and therefore infers that the unclean animal in question is
not a Weasel, but a kind of mole.
The Weasel does exist in Palestine, and seems to be as plentiful
there as in our own country. Indeed, the whole tribe of Weasels
is well represented, and the polecat is seen there as well as the
Weasel.
There is hardly any animal which, for its size, is so much dreaded
by the creatures on which it preys as the common Weasel.
Although its small proportions render a single Weasel an
insignificant opponent to man or dog, yet it can wage a sharp battle
even with such powerful foes, and refuses to yield except at the
last necessity.
The proportions of the Weasel are extremely small, a full-grown male
not exceeding ten inches in length. The color of its fur is bright
reddish-brown on the upper parts of the body, and the under-portions
are pure white. The audacity and courage of this little animal are
really remarkable. It seems to hold every being except itself in the
most sovereign contempt, and, to all appearances, is as ready to
match itself against a man as against a mouse.
It is a terrible foe to many of the smaller animals, such as rats
and mice, and performs a really good service to the farmer in
destroying many of these farmyard pests. The Weasel is specially
dreaded by rats and mice, because there is no hole through which
they can pass that will not also admit the passage of their enemy;
and, as the Weasel is most persevering and determined in pursuit, it
seldom happens that rats or mice escape when their little foe has
set itself fairly on their track.
[Illustration: WEASELS.]
Not only does the Weasel pursue its prey through the windings of
the burrows, but it will even cross water in the chase. When it
has at last reached its victim, it leaps upon the devoted creature
and endeavours to fix its teeth in the back of the neck, where it
retains its deadly hold in spite of every struggle on the part of
the wounded animal. If the attack be rightly made and the animal a
small one, the Weasel can drive its teeth into the brain and cause
instantaneous death.
The Weasel is very fond of eggs, and young birds of all kinds. It
is said that an egg that has been broken by a Weasel, can always be
recognized, by the peculiar mode which the little creature employs
for the purpose.
Instead of breaking the egg to pieces or biting a large hole in the
shell, the Weasel contents itself with making quite a small aperture
at one end, through which it abstracts the liquid contents.
A curious example of the courage of the Weasel, is related by a
gentleman who while crossing a field at dusk, saw an owl pounce upon
some object on the ground, and carry it in the air.
In a short time the bird showed signs of distress, trying to free
itself from some annoying object by means of its talons, and
flapping about in a very bewildered manner.
Soon afterwards the owl fell dead to the earth; and when the
spectator of the aërial combat approached, a weasel ran away from
the dead body of the bird, itself being apparently uninjured. On
examination of the owl's body, it was found that the Weasel, which
had been marked out for the owl's repast, had in its turn become the
assailant, and had attacked the unprotected parts which lie beneath
the wings. A considerable wound had been made in that spot, and the
large blood-vessels torn through.
[Illustration: THE BITER BIT.]
[Illustration: scene]
THE BADGER.
Difficulty in identifying the _Tachash_ of Scripture--References
to "Badgers' skins"--The Dugong thought to be the
Badger--The Bedouin sandals--Nature of the materials for
the Tabernacle--Habits of the Badger--The species found in
Palestine--Uses of the Badgers' skins--Looseness of zoological
terms.
Until very lately, there was much difficulty in ascertaining whether
the word _Tachash_ has been rightly translated as Badger. It occurs
in several parts of the Scriptures, and almost invariably is used
in relation to a skin or fur of some sort. We will first examine
the passages in which the Badger is mentioned, and then proceed to
identify the animal.
Nearly all the references to the Badger occur in the book of Exodus,
and form part of the directions for constructing the Tabernacle and
its contents. The first notice of the word occurs in Exodus xxv. 5,
where the people of Israel are ordered to bring their offerings for
the sanctuary, among which offerings are gold, silver, and brass,
blue, purple, and scarlet, fine linen, goats' hair, rams' skins dyed
red, badgers' skins, and shittim wood--all these to be used in the
construction of the Tabernacle. Then a little farther on, in chapter
xxvi. 14, we find one of the special uses to which the badgers'
skins were to be put, namely, to make the outer covering or roof of
the tabernacle. Another use for the badgers' skins was to form an
outer covering for the ark, table of shewbread, and other furniture
of the Tabernacle, when the people were on the march.
In all these cases the badger-skin is used as a covering to defend a
building or costly furniture, but there is one example where it is
employed for a different purpose. This passage occurs in the book
of Ezekiel, chapter xvi. 10. The prophet is speaking of Jerusalem
under the image of a woman, and uses these words, "I anointed thee
with oil; I clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod thee
with badger's skin, and I girded thee about with fine linen, and I
covered thee with silk. I decked thee also with ornaments, and I put
bracelets upon thy hands, and a chain upon thy neck, and I put a
jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful
crown upon thine head."
So we have here the fact, that the same material which was used for
the covering of the Tabernacle, and of the sacred furniture, could
also be used for the manufacture of shoes. This passage is the more
valuable because of an inference which may be drawn from it. The
reader will see that the badger-skin, whatever it may have been,
must have been something of considerable value, and therefore, in
all probability, something of much rarity.
In the present instance, it is classed with the most luxurious
robes that were known in those days, and it is worthy of special
mention among the bracelet, earrings, necklace, and coronal with
which the symbolized city was adorned. If the reader will now refer
to the passage in which the children of Israel were commanded to
bring their offerings, he will see that in those cases also the
badger-skins were ranked with the costliest articles of apparel
that could be found, and had evidently been brought from Egypt, the
peculiar home of all the arts; together with the vast quantity of
gold and jewels which were used for the same sacred purpose.
Now we find that the badger-skins in question must possess three
qualities: they must be costly, they must be capable of forming a
defence against the weather, and they must be strong enough to be
employed in the manufacture of shoes. If we accept the word Tachash
as signifying a Badger, we shall find that these conditions have
been fulfilled.
But many commentators have thought that badger-skins could not
have been procured in sufficient numbers for the purpose, and have
therefore conjectured that some other animal must be signified by
the word Tachash.
A species of dugong (_Halicore hemprichii_) is the animal that has
been selected as the Badger of the Scriptures. It is one of the
marine mammalia, and always lives near the shore, where it can find
the various algæ on which it feeds. It is a gregarious animal,
and, as it frequently ascends rivers for some distance, it may be
captured in sufficient numbers to make both its flesh and skin
useful. Moreover, it is of considerable size, fourteen or fifteen
feet in length being its usual dimensions, so that a comparatively
small number of the skins would be required for the covering of the
Tabernacle.
That shoes can be made of it is evident from the fact that at the
present day shoes, or rather sandals, are made from its hide, and
are commonly used by the Bedouins. But the very qualities and
peculiarities which render it a fit material for the sandal of a
half-naked Bedouin Arab, who has to walk continually over hard, hot,
sandy, and rough ground, would surely make it unsuitable for the
delicate shoes worn by a woman of rank who spends her time in the
house, and the rest of whose clothing is of fine linen and silk,
embroidered with gold and jewels. In our own country, the hobnailed
shoes of the ploughman and the slight shoe of a lady are made of
very different materials, and it is reasonable to conjecture that
such was the case when the passage in question was written.
Then Dr. Robinson, who admits that the hide of the dugong could
hardly have been used as the material for a lady's shoe, thinks that
it would have answered very well for the roof of the Tabernacle,
because it was large, clumsy, and coarse. It seems strange that he
did not also perceive that the two latter qualities would completely
disqualify such skins for that service. Everything clumsy and
coarse was studiously prohibited, and nothing but the very best
was considered fit for the Tabernacle of the Lord. By special
revelation, Moses was instructed to procure, not merely the ordinary
timber of the country for the framework--not only the fabrics which
would keep out rain and wind--not simply the metals in common use,
from which to make the lamps and other furniture--not the ordinary
oils for supplying the lamps; but, on the contrary, the finest
linen, the most elaborate embroidery, the rarest woods, the purest
gold, the costliest gems, were demanded, and nothing common or
inferior was accepted. The commonest material that was permitted
was the long, soft fleece of rams' wool; but, even in that case,
the wool had to be dyed of the regal scarlet--a dye so rare and so
costly that none but the wealthiest rulers could use it. Even the
very oil that burned in the lamps must be the purest olive-oil,
prepared expressly for that purpose.
[Illustration: BADGERS.]
The very fact, therefore, that any article was plentiful and could
easily be obtained, would be a proof that such article was not
used for so sacred a purpose; while it is impossible that anything
coarse and clumsy could have been accepted for the construction
of that Tabernacle within which the Shekinah ever burned over the
Mercy-seat--over which the cloud rested by day, and the fire shone
by night, visible external proofs of the Divine glory within.
We therefore dismiss from our minds the possibility of accepting
any material for it which was not exceptionably valuable, and which
would be employed in the uses of ordinary life. The great object of
the minutely-elaborate directions which were given through Moses to
the Israelites was evidently to keep continually before their eyes
the great truth that they owed all to God, and that their costliest
offerings were but acknowledgments of their dependence.
We will now presume that the Tachash of the Pentateuch and Ezekiel
is really the animal which we know by the name of Badger. It exists
throughout the whole of the district traversed by the Israelites,
though it is not very plentiful, nor is it easily taken. Had such
been the case, its fur would not have been employed in the service
of the sanctuary.
It is nocturnal in its habits, and very seldom is seen during the
hours of daylight, so that it cannot be captured by chase. It is
not gregarious, so that it cannot be taken in great numbers, as is
the case with certain wild animals which have been thought to be
the Tachash of Scripture. It is not a careless animal, so that it
cannot be captured or killed without the exercise of considerable
ingenuity, and the expenditure of much time and trouble. It is one
of the burrowing animals, digging for itself a deep subterranean
home, and always ready whenever it is alarmed to escape into
the dark recesses of its dwelling, from which it can scarcely be
dislodged. It is not a large animal, so that a considerable number
of skins would be required in order to make a covering which should
overlap a structure forty-five feet in length and fifteen in
breadth. Were it a solitary animal, there might be a difficulty in
procuring a sufficient number of skins. But it is partly gregarious
in its habits, living together in small families, seven or eight
being sometimes found to inhabit a single dwelling-place. It
is, therefore, sufficiently rare to make its skin valuable, and
sufficiently plentiful to furnish the requisite number of skins.
All these facts tend to show that the cost of such a covering
must have been very great, even though it was the outermost, and,
consequently, the least valuable of the four. It has been suggested
that these skins were only used to lay over the lines where the
different sets of coverings overlapped each other, and that, in
consequence, they need not have been very numerous.
[Illustration: SUPPOSED FORM AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE TABERNACLE,
CAMP, ETC.]
But we find that these same skins, which were evidently those
which formed the external roof, were used, when the Tabernacle was
taken down, for the purpose of forming distinct coverings for the
ark of the testimony, the table of shewbread, the seven-branched
candlestick, the golden altar, the various vessels used in the
ministrations, and lastly, the altar of sacrifice itself. Thus, when
we recollect the dimensions of the ark, the table, the candlestick,
and the two altars, we shall see that, in order to make separate
covers for them, a quantity of material would be used which would be
amply sufficient to cover the whole roof of the Tabernacle, even if
it had, as was most probably the case, a ridged, and not a flat roof.
We now come to our next point, namely, the aptitude of the Badger's
skin to resist weather. Any one who has handled the skin of the
Badger will acknowledge that a better material could hardly be
found. The fur is long, thick, and, though light, is moderately
stiff, the hairs falling over each other in such a manner as to
throw off rain or snow as off a penthouse. And, as to the third
point, namely, its possible use as a material for the manufacture
of shoes, we may call to mind that the skin of the Badger is
proverbially tough, and that this very quality has caused the animal
to be subjected to most cruel treatment by a class of sporting men
which is now almost extinct.
The Septuagint gives little assistance in determining the precise
nature of the Tachash, and rather seems to consider the word as
expressive of the colour with which the fur was dyed than that of
the animal from which it was taken. Still, it must be remembered
that not only are zoological terms used very loosely in the
Scriptures, but that in Hebrew, as in all other languages, the same
combination of letters often expresses two different ideas, so
that the word Tachash may equally signify a colour and an animal.
Moreover, it has been well pointed out that the repeated use of the
word in the plural number shows that it cannot refer to colour;
while its almost invariable combination with the Hebrew word that
signifies a skin implies that it does not refer to colour, but to an
animal.
What that animal may be, is, as I have already mentioned,
conjectural. But, as the authorized translation renders the word as
Badger, and as this reading fulfils the conditions necessary to its
identification, and as no other reading does fulfil them, we cannot
be very far wrong if we accept that translation as the correct one,
and assume the Tachash of the Scriptures to be the animal which we
call by the name of Badger.
THE BEAR.
The Syrian Bear--Identity of the Hebrew and Arabic titles--Its
colour variable according to age--Bears once numerous in
Palestine, and now only occasionally seen--Reason for their
diminution--Present localities of the Bear, and its favourite
haunts--Food of the Bear--Its general habits--Its ravages among
the flocks--The Bear dangerous to mankind--The Bear robbed of
her whelps--Illustrative passages--Its mode of fighting--Various
references to the Bear, from the time of Samuel to that of St.
John.
Whatever doubt may exist as to the precise identity of various
animals mentioned in the Scriptures, there is none whatever as to
the creature which is frequently alluded to under the name of Bear.
The Hebrew word is _Dôb_, and it is a remarkable fact that the name
of this animal in the Arabic language is almost identical with the
Hebrew term, namely, _Dubh_. The peculiar species of Bear which
inhabits Palestine is the Syrian Bear (_Ursus Isabellinus_), and,
though it has been variously described by different eye-witnesses,
there is no doubt that the same species was seen by them all. As is
the case with many animals, the Syrian Bear changes its colour as
it grows older. When a cub, it is of a darkish brown, which becomes
a light brown as it approaches maturity. But, when it has attained
its full growth, it becomes cream-coloured, and each succeeding year
seems to lighten its coat, so that a very old Bear is nearly as
white as its relative of the Arctic regions. Travellers, therefore,
who have met the younger specimens, have described them as brown in
hue, while those who have seen more aged individuals have stated
that the colour of the Syrian Bear is white.
Owing to the destruction of forests, the Bear, which is essentially
a lover of the woods, has decreased considerably in number. Yet,
even at the present time, specimens may be seen by the watchful
traveller, mostly about the range of Lebanon, but sometimes at a
considerable distance from that locality. Mr. Tristram, for example,
saw it close to the Lake of Gennesaret. "We never met with so many
wild animals as on one of those days. First of all, a wild boar got
out of some scrub close to us, as we were ascending the valley. Then
a deer was started below, ran up the cliff, and wound along the
ledge, passing close to us. Then a large ichneumon almost crossed my
feet and ran into a cleft; and, while endeavouring to trace him, I
was amazed to see a brown Syrian Bear clumsily but rapidly clamber
down the rocks and cross the ravine. He was, however, far too
cautious to get within hailing distance of any of the riflemen."
The same author mentions that some of the chief strongholds of this
Bear are certain clefts in the face of a precipitous chasm through
which the river Leontes flows. This river runs into the sea a few
miles northward of Tyre, and assists in carrying off the melted
snows from the Lebanon range of mountains. His description is so
picturesque, that it must be given in his own words. "The channel,
though a thousand feet deep, was so narrow that the opposite ridge
was within gunshot. Looking down the giddy abyss, we could see the
cliff on our side partially covered with myrtle, bay, and caper
hanging from the fissures, while the opposite side was perforated
with many shallow caves, the inaccessible eyries of vultures,
eagles, and lanner falcons, which were sailing in multitudes around.
The lower part had many ledges clad with shrubs, the strongholds
of the Syrian Bear, though inaccessible even to goats. Far beneath
dashed the milk-white river, a silver line in a ruby setting of
oleanders, roaring doubtless fiercely, but too distant to be heard
at the height on which we stood. This _cleft_ of the Leontes was the
only true Alpine scenery we had met with in Palestine, and in any
country, and amidst any mountains, it would attract admiration."
[Illustration: BEARS DESCENDING THE MOUNTAINS.]
On those elevated spots the Bear loves to dwell, and throughout the
summer-time generally remains in such localities. For the Bear is
one of the omnivorous animals, and is able to feed on vegetable as
well as animal substances, preferring the former when they can be
found. There is nothing that a Bear likes better than strawberries
and similar fruits, among which it will revel throughout the whole
fruit season, daintily picking the ripest berries, and becoming
wonderfully fat by the constant banquet. Sometimes, when the fruits
fail, it makes incursions among the cultivated grounds, and is noted
for the ravages which it makes among a sort of vetch which is much
grown in the Holy Land.
But during the colder months of the year the Bear changes its diet,
and becomes carnivorous. Sometimes it contents itself with the
various wild animals which it can secure, but sometimes it descends
to the lower plains, and seizes upon the goats and sheep in their
pastures. This habit is referred to by David, in his well-known
speech to Saul, when the king was trying to dissuade him from
matching himself against the gigantic Philistine. "And Saul said
to David, Thou art not able to go against this Philistine to fight
with him: for thou art but a youth, and he a man of war from his
youth.... Thy servant kept his father's sheep, and there came a
lion and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock: and I went out
after him, and smote him, and delivered it out of his hand; and
when he arose against me, I caught him by the beard, and smote him,
and slew him. Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear: and this
uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them, seeing he hath
defied the armies of the living God."--1 Sam. xvii. 33-36.
[Illustration: ON THE WATCH.]
Though not generally apt to attack mankind, it will do so if first
attacked, and then becomes a most dangerous enemy. See, for example,
that most graphic passage in the book of the prophet Amos, whose
business as a herdsman must have made him conversant with the
habits, not only of the flocks and herds which he kept, but of the
wild beasts which might devour them:--"Woe unto you that desire the
day of the Lord! to what end is it for you? the day of the Lord is
darkness, and not light. As if a man did flee from a lion, and a
bear met him; or went into a house, and leaned his hand on the wall,
and a serpent bit him." (v. 19.)
Another reference to the dangerous character of the Bear is made in
2 Kings ii. 23, 24, in which is recorded that two she-bears came out
of the wood near Bethel, and killed forty-two of the children that
mocked at Elisha.
As the Bear is not swift of foot, but rather clumsy in its
movements, it cannot hope to take the nimbler animals in open chase.
It prefers to lie in wait for them in the bushes, and to strike them
down with a sudden blow of its paw, a terrible weapon, which it can
wield as effectively as the lion uses its claws. An allusion to this
habit is made in the Lamentations of Jeremiah (iii. 10), "He was
unto me as a bear lying in wait, and as a lion in secret places."
Harmless to man as it generally is, there are occasions on which
it becomes a terrible and relentless foe, not seeking to avoid his
presence, but even searching for him, and attacking him as soon
as seen. In the proper season of the year, hunters, or those who
are travelling through those parts of the country infested by the
Bear, will sometimes find the cubs, generally two in number, their
mother having left them in the den while she has gone to search for
food. Although they would not venture to take the initiative in an
attack upon either of the parents, they are glad of an opportunity
which enables them to destroy one or two Bears without danger to
themselves. The young Bears are easily killed or carried off,
because at a very early age they are as confident as they are weak,
and do not try to escape when they see the hunters approaching.
The only danger lies in the possibility that their deed may be
discovered by the mother before they can escape from the locality,
and, if she should happen to return while the robbers are still in
the neighbourhood, a severe conflict is sure to follow. At any time
an angry Bear is a terrible antagonist, especially if it be wounded
with sufficient severity to cause pain, and not severely enough to
cripple its movements. But, when to this easily-roused ferocity is
added the fury of maternal feelings, it may be imagined that the
hunters have good reason to fear its attack.
[Illustration: SEEKING AN OUTLOOK.]
To all animals that rear their young is given a sublime and almost
supernatural courage in defending their offspring, and from the
lioness, that charges a host of armed men when her cubs are in
danger, to the hen, which defies the soaring kite or prowling fox,
or to the spider, that will give up her life rather than abandon
her yet unhatched brood, the same self-sacrificing spirit actuates
them all. Most terrible therefore is the wrath of a creature which
possesses, as is the case of the Bear, the strongest maternal
affections, added to great size, tremendous weapons, and gigantic
strength. That the sight of a Bear bereaved of her young was well
known to both writers and contemporary readers of the Old Testament,
is evident from the fact that it is mentioned by several writers,
and always as a familiar illustration of furious anger. See for
example 2 Sam. xvii. 8, when Hushai is dissuading Absalom from
following the cautious counsel of Ahithophel, "For thou knowest thy
father and his men, that they be mighty men of war, and they be
chafed in their minds as a bear robbed of her whelps in the field."
Solomon also, in the Proverbs (xvii. 12), uses the same image, "Let
a bear robbed of her whelps meet a man, rather than a fool in his
folly."
When the Bear fights, it delivers rapid strokes with its armed paw,
tearing and rending away everything that it strikes. A blow from a
bear's paw has been several times known to strip the entire skin,
together with the hair, from a man's head, and, when fighting with
dogs, to tear its enemies open as if each claw were a chisel.
Bears are capable of erecting themselves on their hinder limbs, and
of supporting themselves in an upright position with the greatest
ease. When attacked in close combat, they have a habit of rearing
themselves upon their hinder feet--a position which enables them to
deliver with the greatest effect the terrific blows with their fore
paws, upon which they chiefly rely in defending themselves.
With fearful ingenuity, the Bear, when engaged with a human foe,
directs its attack upon the head of its antagonist, and, as
previously stated, has been known to strike off the entire scalp
with a single blow.
[Illustration: A FAMILY-PARTY.]
A hunter who had the misfortune to be struck down by a Bear--and
the singular good fortune to afterwards escape from it--says, that
when he was lying on the ground at the mercy of the angry beast,
the animal, after biting him upon the arms and legs, deliberately
settled itself upon his head and began to scarify it in the fiercest
manner, leaving wounds eight and nine inches in length.
Bears are the more terrible antagonists from their extreme tenacity
of life, and the fearful energy which they compress into the last
moment of existence, when they are suffering from a mortal wound.
Unless struck in the heart or brain, the mortally-wounded Bear is
more to be feared than if it had received no injury whatever, and
contrives to wreak more harm in the few minutes that immediately
precede its death, than it had achieved while still uninjured.
Many a hunter has received mortal hurts by incautiously approaching
a Bear, which lay apparently dead, but was in reality only stunned.
[Illustration: bear]
[Illustration: porcupine]
THE PORCUPINE.
Presumed identity of the Kippôd with the Porcupine--Habits
of the Porcupine--the common Porcupine found plentifully in
Palestine.
Although, like the hedgehog, the Porcupine is not mentioned by name
in the Scriptures, many commentators think that the word Kippôd
signifies both the hedgehog and Porcupine.
That the two animals should be thought to be merely two varieties
of one species is not astonishing, when we remember the character
of the people among whom the Porcupine lives. Not having the least
idea of scientific geology, they look only to the most conspicuous
characteristics, and because the Porcupine and hedgehog are both
covered with an armature of quills, and the quills are far more
conspicuous than the teeth, the inhabitants of Palestine naturally
class the two animals together. In reality, they belong to two very
different orders, the hedgehog being classed with the shrew-mice and
moles, while the Porcupine is a rodent animal, and is classed with
the rats, rabbits, beavers, marmots, and other rodents.
It is quite as common in Palestine as the hedgehog, a fact which
increases the probability that the two animals may have been
mentioned under a common title. Being a nocturnal animal, it retires
during the day-time to some crevice in a rock or burrow in the
ground, and there lies sleeping until the sunset awakens it and
calls it to action. And as the hedgehog is also a nocturnal animal,
the similarity of habit serves to strengthen the mutual resemblance.
The Porcupine is peculiarly fitted for living in dry and unwatered
spots, as, like many other animals, of which our common rabbit is a
familiar example, it can exist without water, obtaining the needful
moisture from the succulent roots on which it feeds.
The sharply pointed quills with which its body is covered are solid,
and strengthened in a most beautiful manner by internal ribs, that
run longitudinally through them, exactly like those of the hollow
iron masts, which are now coming so much into use. As they are,
in fact, greatly developed hairs, they are continually shed and
replaced, and when they are about to fall are so loosely attached
that they fall off if pulled slightly, or even if the animal shakes
itself. Consequently the shed quills that lie about the localities
inhabited by the Porcupine indicate its whereabouts, and so
plentiful are these quills in some places, that quite a bundle can
be collected in a short time.
There are many species of Porcupines which inhabit different parts
of the world, but that which has been mentioned is the common
Porcupine of Europe, Asia, and Africa.
THE MOLE.
The two Hebrew words which are translated as Mole--Obscurity of
the former name--A parallel case in our own language--The second
name--The Moles and the Bats, why associated together--The
real Mole of Scripture, its different names, and its place
in zoology--Description of the Mole-rat and its general
habits--Curious superstition--Discovery of the species by Mr.
Tristram--Scripture and science--How the Mole-rat finds its
food--Distinction between the Mole and the present animal.
There are two words which are translated as Mole in our authorized
version of the Bible. One of them is so obscure that there seems no
possibility of deciding the creature that is represented by it. We
cannot even tell to what class of the animal kingdom it refers,
because in more than one place it is mentioned as one of the unclean
birds that might not be eaten (translated as _swan_ in our version),
whereas, in another place, it is enumerated among the unclean
creeping things.
[Illustration: THE MOLE-RAT.]
We may conjecture that the same word might be used to designate two
distinct animals, though we have no clue to their identification. It
is rather a strange coincidence, in corroboration of this theory,
that our word Mole signifies three distinct objects--firstly, an
animal; secondly, a cutaneous growth; and thirdly, a bank of earth.
Now, supposing English to be a dead language, like the Hebrew, it
may well be imagined that a translator of an English book would feel
extremely perplexed when he saw the word Mole used in such widely
different senses.
The best Hebraists can do no more than offer a conjecture founded
on the structure of the word _Tinshemeth_, which is thought by some
to be the chameleon. Some think that it is the Mole, some the ibis,
some the salamander, while others consider it to be the centipede;
and in neither case have any decisive arguments been adduced.
We will therefore leave the former of these two names, and proceed
to the second, _Chephor-peroth_.
This word occurs in that passage of Isaiah which has already been
quoted when treating of the bat. "In that day a man shall cast his
idols of silver and his idols of gold, which they made each one to
himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; to go into the
clefts of the rocks and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear
of the Lord and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to
shake terribly the earth."
It is highly probable that the animal in question is the Mole of
Palestine, which is not the same as our European species, but is
much larger in size, and belongs to a different order of mammalia.
The true Mole is one of the insectivorous and carnivorous animals,
and is allied to the shrews and the hedgehogs; whereas the Mole of
Palestine (_Spalax typhlus_) is one of the rodents, and allied to
the rabbits, mice, marmots, and jerboas. A better term for it is the
Mole-rat, by which name it is familiar to zoologists. It is also
known by the names of Slepez and Nenni.
In length it is about eight inches, and its colour is a pale slate.
As is the case with the true Moles, the eyes are of very minute
dimensions, and are not visible through the thick soft fur with
which the whole head and body are covered. Neither are there any
visible external ears, although the ear is really very large, and
extremely sensitive to sound. This apparent privation of both
ears and eyes gives to the animal a most singular and featureless
appearance, its head being hardly recognisable as such but for
the mouth, and the enormous projecting teeth, which not only look
formidable, but really are so. There is a curious superstition in
the Ukraine, that if a man will dare to grasp a Mole-rat in his bare
hand, allow it to bite him, and then squeeze it to death, the hand
that did the deed will ever afterwards possess the virtue of healing
goitre or scrofula.
This animal is spread over a very large tract of country, and is
very common in Palestine. Mr. Tristram gives an interesting account
of its discovery. "We had long tried in vain to capture the Mole
of Palestine. Its mines and its mounds we had seen everywhere, and
reproached ourselves with having omitted the mole-trap among the
items of our outfit. From the size of the mounds and the shallowness
of the subterranean passages, we felt satisfied it could not be the
European species, and our hopes of solving the question were raised
when we found that one of them had taken up its quarters close to
our camp. After several vain attempts to trap it, an Arab one night
brought a live Mole in a jar to the tent. It was no Mole properly so
called, but the Mole-rat, which takes its place throughout Western
Asia. The man, having observed our anxiety to possess a specimen,
refused to part with it for less than a hundred piastres, and
scornfully rejected the twenty piastres I offered. Ultimately, Dr.
Chaplin purchased it for five piastres after our departure, and I
kept it alive for some time in a box, feeding it on sliced onions."
The same gentleman afterwards caught many of the Mole-rats, and
kept them in earthen vessels, as they soon gnawed their way through
wood. They fed chiefly on bulbs, but also ate sopped bread. Like
many other animals, they reposed during the day, and were active
throughout the night.
The author then proceeds to remark on the peculiarly appropriate
character of the prophecy that the idols should be cast to the
Moles and the bats. Had the European Mole been the animal to
which reference was made, there would have been comparatively
little significance in the connexion of the two names, because,
although both animals are lovers of darkness, they do not inhabit
similar localities. But the Mole-rat is fond of frequenting
deserted ruins and burial-places, so that the Moles and the bats
are really companions, and as such are associated together in the
sacred narrative. Here, as in many other instances, we find that
closer study of the Scriptures united to more extended knowledge
are by no means the enemies of religion, as some well-meaning,
but narrow-minded persons think. On the contrary, the Scriptures
were never so well understood, and their truth and force so well
recognised, as at the present day; and science has proved to be,
not the destroyer of the Bible, but its interpreter. We shall soon
cease to hear of "Science _versus_ the Bible," and shall substitute
"Science and the Bible _versus_ Ignorance and Prejudice."
The Mole-rat needs not to dig such deep tunnels as the true Moles,
because its food does not lie so deep. The Moles live chiefly upon
earthworms, and are obliged to procure them in the varying depths
to which they burrow. But the Mole-rat lives mostly upon roots,
preferring those of a bulbous nature. Now bulbous roots are, as
a rule, situated near the surface of the ground, and, therefore,
any animal which feeds upon them must be careful not to burrow too
deeply, lest it should pass beneath them. The shallowness of the
burrows is thus accounted for. Gardens are often damaged by this
animal, the root-crops, such as carrots and onions, affording plenty
of food without needing much exertion.
The Mole-rat does not keep itself quite so jealously secluded as
does our common Mole, but occasionally will come out of the burrow
and lie on the ground, enjoying the warm sunshine. Still it is not
easily to be approached; for though its eyes are almost useless, the
ears are so sharp, and the animal is so wary, that at the sound of a
footstep it instantly seeks the protection of its burrow, where it
may bid defiance to its foes.
How it obtains its food is a mystery. There seems to be absolutely
no method of guiding itself to the precise spot where a bulb may
be growing. It is not difficult to conjecture the method by which
the Mole discovers its prey. Its sensitive ears may direct it to
the spot where a worm is driving its way through the earth, and
should it come upon its prey, the very touch of the worm, writhing
in terror at the approach of its enemy, would be sufficient to act
as a guide. I have kept several Moles, and always noticed that,
though they would pass close to a worm without seeming to detect
its presence, either by sight or scent, at the slightest touch they
would spring round, dart on the worm, and in a moment seize it
between their jaws. But with the Mole-rat the case is different. The
root can utter no sound, and can make no movement, nor is it likely
that the odour of the bulb should penetrate through the earth to a
very great distance.
[Illustration: mice]
THE MOUSE.
The Mice which marred the land--The Field-mouse--Its destructive
habits and prolific nature--The Hamster, and its habits--The
Jerboa, its activity and destructiveness--Various species of
Dormice and Sand-rats.
That the Mouse mentioned in the Old Testament was some species
of rodent animal is tolerably clear, though it is impossible to
state any particular species as being signified by the Hebrew word
_Akbar_. The probable derivation of this name is from two words
which signify "destruction of corn," and it is therefore evident
that allusion is made to some animal which devours the produce of
the fields, and which exists in sufficient numbers to make its
voracity formidable.
Some commentators on the Old Testament translate the word Akbar
as jerboa. Now, although the jerboa is common in Syria, it is not
nearly so plentiful as other rodent animals, and would scarcely
be selected as the means by which a terrible disaster is made to
befall a whole country. The student of Scripture is well aware
that, in those exceptional occurrences which are called miracles, a
needless development of the wonder-working power is never employed.
We are not to suppose, for example, that the clouds of locusts that
devoured the harvests of the Egyptians were created for this express
purpose, but that their already existing hosts were concentrated
upon a limited area, instead of being spread over a large surface.
Nor need we fancy that the frogs which rendered their habitations
unclean, and contaminated their food, were brought into existence
simply to inflict a severe punishment on the fastidious and
superstitious Egyptians.
Of course, had such an exercise of creative power been needed, it
would have been used, but we can all see that a needless miracle
is never worked. He who would not suffer even a crumb of the
miraculously multiplied bread to be wasted, is not likely to waste
that power by which the miracle was wrought.
[Illustration: DAGON FALLEN DOWN BEFORE THE ARK.]
If we refer to the early history of the Israelitish nation, as
told in 1 Sam. iv.-vi., we shall find that the Israelites made an
unwarrantable use of the ark, by taking it into battle, and that it
was captured and carried off into the country of the Philistines.
Then various signs were sent to warn the captors to send the ark
back to its rightful possessors. Dagon, their great god, was
prostrated before it, painful diseases attacked them, so that many
died, and scarcely any seem to have escaped, while their harvests
were ravaged by numbers of "mice that marred the land."
[Illustration: MOUSE AND NEST.]
The question is now simple enough. If the ordinary translation is
accepted, and the word Akbar rendered as Mouse, would the necessary
conditions be fulfilled, _i.e._ would the creature be destructive,
and would it exist in very great numbers? Now we shall find that
both these conditions are fulfilled by the common Field-mouse.
This little creature is, in proportion to its size, one of the most
destructive animals in the world. Let its numbers be increased from
any cause whatever, and it will most effectually "mar the land." It
will devour every cereal that is sown, and kill almost any sapling
that is planted. It does not even wait for the corn to spring up,
but will burrow beneath the surface, and dig out the seed before it
has had time to sprout. In the early part of the year, it will eat
the green blade as soon as it springs out of the ground, and is an
adept at climbing the stalks of corn, and plundering the ripe ears
in the autumn.
[Illustration: JERBOA, OR LEAPING MOUSE.]
When stacked or laid up in barns, the harvest is by no means safe,
for the Mice will penetrate into any ordinary barn, and find their
way into any carelessly-built stack, from which they can scarcely be
ejected. The rat itself is not so dire a foe to the farmer, as the
less obtrusive, but equally mischievous Field-mouse. The ferret will
drive the rats out of their holes, and if they have taken possession
of a wheat-stack they can be ejected by depriving them of access to
water. But the burrows of the Field-mouse are so small that a ferret
cannot make its way through them, and the nightly dew that falls on
the stack affords an ample supply of water.
[Illustration: THE FIELD-MOUSE.]
When the Field-mouse is deprived of the food which it loves best,
it finds a subsistence among the trees. Whenever mice can discover
a newly-planted sapling, they hold great revel upon it, eating away
the tender young bark as high as they can reach, and consequently
destroying the tree as effectually as if it were cut down. Even
when the young trees fail them, and no tender bark is to be had,
the Field-mice can still exert their destructive powers. They will
then betake themselves to the earth, burrow beneath its surface,
and devour the young rootlets of the forest trees. All botanists
know that a healthy tree is continually pushing forward fresh roots
below the ground, in order to gain sufficient nourishment to supply
the increasing growth above. If, therefore, these young roots are
destroyed, the least harm that can happen to the tree is that its
further growth is arrested; while, in many cases, the tree, which
cannot repair the injuries it has received, droops gradually, and
finally dies. Even in this country, the Field-mouse has proved
itself a terrible enemy to the agriculturist, and has devastated
considerable tracts of land.
So much for the destructive powers of the Field-mouse, and the next
point to be considered is its abundance.
Nearly all the rats and mice are singularly prolific animals,
producing a considerable number at a brood, and having several
broods in a season. The Field-mouse is by no means an exception to
the general rule, but produces as many young in a season as any of
the Mice.
Not only is it formidable from its numbers, but from the insidious
nature of its attacks. Any one can see a rabbit, a hare, or even
a rat; but to see a Field-mouse is not easy, even when the little
creatures are present in thousands. A Field-mouse never shows itself
except from necessity, its instinct teaching it to escape the
observation of its many furred and feathered enemies. Short-legged
and soft-furred, it threads its noiseless way among the herbage
with such gentle suppleness that scarcely a grass-blade is stirred,
while, if it should be forced to pass over a spot of bare ground,
the red-brown hue of its fur prevents it from being detected by an
inexperienced eye. Generally the Field-mouse is safe from human
foes, and has only to dread the piercing eye and swift wings of the
hawk, or the silent flight and sharp talons of the owl.
Although there can be no doubt that the Field-mouse is one of the
animals to which the name of Akbar is given, it is probable that
many species were grouped under this one name. Small rodents of
various kinds are very plentiful in Palestine, and there are several
species closely allied to the Field-mouse itself.
Among them is the Hamster (_Cricetus frumentarius_), so widely
known for the ravages which it makes among the crops. This terribly
destructive animal not only steals the crops for immediate
subsistence, but lays up a large stock of provisions for the winter,
seeming to be actuated by a sort of miserly passion for collecting
and storing away. There seems to be no bounds to the quantity of
food which a Hamster will carry into its subterranean store-house,
from seventy to one hundred pounds' weight being sometimes taken
out of the burrow of a single animal. The fact of the existence
of these large stores shows that the animal must need them, and
accordingly we find that the Hamster is only a partial hibernator,
as it is awake during a considerable portion of the winter months,
and is consequently obliged to live on the stores which it has
collected.
It is an exceedingly prolific animal, each pair producing on an
average twenty-five young in the course of a year. The families
are unsociable, and, as soon as they are strong enough to feed
themselves, the young Hamsters leave their home, and make separate
burrows for themselves. Thus we see that the Hamster, as well as the
Field-mouse, fulfils the conditions which are needed in order to
class it under the general title of Akbar.
I have already stated that some translators of the Bible use the
word Jerboa as a rendering of the Hebrew Akbar. As the Jerboa
certainly is found in Palestine, there is some foundation for this
idea, and we may safely conjecture that it also is one of the
smaller rodents which are grouped together under the appellation of
Mouse.
The Common Jerboa (_Dipus Ægyptiacus_) is plentiful in Palestine,
and several other species inhabit the same country, known at once
by their long and slender legs, which give them so curious a
resemblance to the kangaroos of Australia. The Jerboas pass over the
ground with astonishing rapidity. Instead of creeping stealthily
among the grass-blades, like the short-limbed field-mouse, the
Jerboa flies along with a succession of wonderful leaps, darting
here and there with such rapidity that the eye can scarcely follow
its wayward movements. When quiet and undisturbed, it hops along
gently enough, but as soon as it takes alarm, it darts off in its
peculiar manner, which is to the ordinary walk of quadrupeds what
the devious course of a frightened snipe is to the steady flight of
birds in general.
It prefers hot and dry situations, its feet being defended by a
thick coating of stiff hairs, which serve the double purpose of
protecting it from the heat, and giving it a firm hold on the
ground. It is rather a destructive animal, its sharp and powerful
teeth enabling it to bite its way through obstacles which would
effectually stop an ordinary Mouse. That the Jerboa may be one of
the Akbarim is rendered likely by the prohibition in Lev. xi. 29,
forbidding the Mouse to be eaten. It would be scarcely probable
that such a command need have been issued against eating the common
Mouse, whereas the Jerboa, a much larger and palatable animal, is
always eaten by the Arabs. The Hamster is at the present day eaten
in Northern Syria.
Beside these creatures there are the Dormice, several species of
which animal inhabit Palestine at the present day. There are also
the Sand-rats, one species of which is larger than our ordinary
rats. The Sand-rats live more in the deserts than the cultivated
lands, making their burrows at the foot of hills, and among the
roots of bushes.
THE HARE.
The prohibitions of the Mosaic law--The chewing of the
cud, and division of the hoof--Identity of the Hare of
Scripture--Rumination described--The Hare a rodent and not
a ruminant--Cowper and his Hares--Structure of the rodent
tooth--The Mosaic law accommodated to its recipients--The Hares
of Palestine and their habits.
Among the many provisions of the Mosaic law are several which refer
to the diet of the Israelites, and which prohibit certain kinds of
food. Special stress is laid upon the flesh of animals, and the list
of those which may be lawfully eaten is a singularly restricted one,
all being excluded except those which "divide the hoof and chew
the cud." And, lest there should be any mistake about the matter,
examples are given both of those animals which may and those which
may not be eaten.
The ox, sheep, goat, and antelopes generally are permitted as
lawful food, because they fulfil both conditions; whereas there is
a special prohibition of the swine, because it divides the hoof but
does not chew the cud, and of the camel, coney, and hare because
they chew the cud, but do not divide the hoof. Our business at
present is with the last of these animals.
Considerable discussion has been raised concerning this animal,
because, as is well known to naturalists, the Hare is not one of
the ruminant animals, but belongs to the same order as the rat,
rabbit, beaver, and other rodents. Neither its teeth nor its stomach
are constructed for the purpose of enabling it to ruminate, _i.e._
to return into the mouth the partially-digested food, and then to
masticate it afresh; and therefore it has been thought that either
there is some mistake in the sacred narrative or that the Hebrew
word has been mistranslated.
[Illustration: THE SYRIAN HARE.]
Taking the latter point first, as being the simplest of the two, we
find that the Hebrew word which is rendered as Hare is Arnebeth, and
that it is rendered in the Septuagint as Dasypus, or the Hare,--a
rendering which the Jewish Bible adopts. That the Arnebeth is really
the Hare may also be conjectured from the fact that the Arabic name
for that animal is Arneb. In consequence of the rather wide sense
to which the Greek word Dasypus (_i.e._ hairy-foot) is used, some
commentators have suggested that the rabbit may have been included
in the same title. This, however, is not at all likely, inasmuch as
the Hare is very plentiful in Palestine, and the rabbit is believed
not to be indigenous to that part of the world. And, even if the two
animals had been classed under the same title, the physiological
difficulty would not be removed.
Before proceeding further, it will be as well to give a brief
description of the curious act called rumination, or "chewing the
cud."
There are certain animals, such as the oxen, antelopes, deer,
sheep, goats, camels, &c. which have teeth unfitted for the rapid
mastication of food, and which therefore are supplied with a
remarkable apparatus by which the food can be returned into the
mouth when the animal has leisure, and be re-masticated before it
passes into the true digestive organs.
For this purpose they are furnished with four stomachs, which are
arranged in the following order. First comes the paunch or "rumen"
(whence the word "ruminating"), into which passes the food in a
very rough state, just as it is torn, rather than bitten, from the
herbage, and which is analogous to the crop in birds. It thence
passes into the second stomach, or "honeycomb," the walls of which
are covered with small angular cells. Into those cells the food is
received from the first stomach, and compressed into little balls,
which can be voluntarily returned into the mouth for mastication.
After the second mastication has been completed, the food passes at
once into the third stomach, and thence into the fourth, which is
the true digesting cavity. By a peculiar structure of these organs,
the animal is able to convey its food either into the first or third
stomach, at will, _i.e._ into the first when the grass is eaten, and
into the third after rumination. Thus it will be seen that an animal
which chews the cud must have teeth of a certain character, and be
possessed of the fourfold stomach which has just been described.
Two points are conceded which seem to be utterly irreconcilable with
each other. The first is that the Mosaic law distinctly states that
the Hare chews the cud; the second is that in point of fact the
Hare is not, and cannot be, a ruminating animal, possessing neither
the teeth nor the digestive organs which are indispensable for that
process. Yet, totally opposed as these statements appear to be, they
are in fact, not so irreconcilable as they seem.
[Illustration: A TIMID GROUP.]
Why the flesh of certain animals was prohibited, we do not at the
present time know. That the flesh of swine should be forbidden food
is likely enough, considering the effects which the habitual eating
of swine's flesh is said to produce in hot countries. But it does
seem very strange that the Israelites should have been forbidden
to eat the flesh of the camel, the coney (or hyrax), and the Hare,
and that these animals should have been specified is a proof that
the eating or refraining from their flesh was not a mere sanitary
regulation, but was a matter of importance. The flesh of all these
three animals is quite as good and nutritious as that of the oxen,
or goats, which are eaten in Palestine, and that of the Hare is far
superior to them. Therefore, the people of Israel, who were always
apt to take liberties with the restrictive laws, and were crafty
enough to evade them on so many occasions, would have been likely
to pronounce that the flesh of the Hare was lawful meat, because
the animal chewed the cud, or appeared to do so, and they would
discreetly have omitted the passage which alluded to the division of
the hoof.
To a non-scientific observer the Hare really does appear to chew
the cud. When it is reposing at its ease, it continually moves its
jaws about as if eating something, an action which may readily
be mistaken for true rumination. Even Cowper, the poet, who kept
some hares for several years, and had them always before his eyes,
was deceived by this mumbling movement of the jaws. Speaking of
his favourite hare, "Puss," he proceeds as follows: "Finding him
exceedingly tractable, I made it my custom to carry him always after
breakfast into the garden, where he hid himself generally under the
leaves of a cucumber vine, sleeping, _or chewing the cud_, till
evening."
The real object of this continual grinding or mumbling movement is
simple enough. The chisel-like incisor teeth of the rodent animals
need to be rubbed against each other, in order to preserve their
edge and shape, and if perchance such friction should be wanting to
a tooth, as, for example, by the breaking of the opposite tooth,
it becomes greatly elongated, and sometimes grows to such a length
as to prevent the animal from eating. Instinctively, therefore,
the Hare, as well as the rabbit and other rodents, always likes to
be nibbling at something, as any one knows who has kept rabbits in
wooden hutches, the object of this nibbling not being to eat the
wood, but to keep the teeth in order.
But we may naturally ask ourselves, why the Mosaic law, an emanation
from heaven, should mention an animal as being a ruminant, when its
very structure shows that such an act was utterly impossible? The
answer is clear enough. The law was suited to the capacity of those
for whom it was intended, and was never meant to be a handbook of
science, as well as a code of religious duties and maxims. The Jews,
like other Orientals, were indifferent to that branch of knowledge
which we designate by the name of physical science, and it was
necessary that the language in which the law was conveyed to them
should be accommodated to their capabilities of receiving it.
It would have been worse than useless to have interrupted the solemn
revelation of Divine will with a lesson in comparative anatomy; the
object of the passage in question being, not to teach the Jews the
distinctive characteristics of a rodent and a ruminant, but to guard
against their mistaking the Hare for one of the ruminants which
were permitted as food. That they would in all probability have
fallen into that mistake is evident from the fact that the Arabs are
exceedingly fond of the flesh of the Hare, and accept it, as well as
the camel, as lawful food, because it chews the cud, the division of
the hoof not being considered by them as an essential.
Hares are very plentiful in Palestine, and at least two species are
found in that country. One of them, which inhabits the more northern
and hilly portion of Palestine, closely resembles our own species,
but has not ears quite so long in proportion, while the head is
broader. The second species, which lives in the south, and in the
valley of the Jordan, is very small, is of a light dun colour, and
has very long ears. In their general habits, these Hares resemble
the Hare of England.
CATTLE.
The cattle of Palestine, and their decadence at the present
day--Ox-flesh not used for food in modern times--Oxen of
the stall, and oxen of the pasture--The use of the ox in
agriculture--The yoke and its structure--The plough and the
goad--The latter capable of being used as a weapon--Treading
out the corn--The cart and its wheels--The ox used as a
beast of burden--Cattle turned loose to graze--The bulls of
Bashan--Curiosity of the ox-tribe--A season of drought--Branding
the cattle--An Egy
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/44685