After Jacob had deceived his father, in procuring for himself the

blessing which was intended for his elder brother, Isaac comforts Esau

by the prophecy that, although he must serve his brother, yet "it

shall come to pass when thou shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt

break his yoke from off thy neck." Again, in the next passage where

the yoke is mentioned, namely, Lev. xxvi. 13, the word is employed in

the metaphorical sense: "I am the Lord your God, which brought you

forth out of the land of Egypt, that ye should not be their bondmen,

and I have broken the bands of your yoke, and made you go upright."

Then, in Deut. xxviii. 48, the word yoke is not only used

metaphorically, but with an addition that forcibly expresses its

weight and galling character: "Therefore shalt thou serve thine

enemies, which the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger, and in

thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things, and He shall put

a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until He have destroyed thee."

The word yoke is also used as a metaphor for servitude, even of a

domestic character, as we may see in 1 Tim. vi. 1: "Let as many

servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all

honour." In the Acts of the Apostles, we find St. Peter using the same

metaphor: "Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke on the neck of the

disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" And

the Lord Himself uses the same metaphor in the well-known passage,

"Take my yoke upon you, for my yoke is easy and my burden light."

The plough was equally simple, and consisted essentially of a bent

branch, one end of which was armed with an iron point by way of a

share, while the other formed the pole or beam, and was fastened to

the middle of the yoke. It was guided by a handle, which was usually a

smaller branch that grew from the principal one. A nearly similar

instrument is used in Asia Minor to the present day, and is a curious

relic of the most ancient times of history, for we find on the

Egyptian monuments figures of the various agricultural processes, in

which the plough is made after this simple manner.

[Illustration: "It is good for a man to bear the yoke in his

youth."--LAM. iii. 27.

"He maketh them also to skip like a calf."--PSALM xxix. 6.]

Of course such an instrument is a very ineffective one, and can but

scratch, rather than plough the ground, the warmth of the climate and

fertility of the land rendering needless the deep ploughing of our own

country, where the object is to turn up the earth to the greatest

possible depth. One yoke of oxen was generally sufficient to draw a

plough, but occasionally a much greater number were required. We read,

for example, of Elisha, who, when he received his call from Elijah,

was ploughing with twelve yoke of oxen, i.e. twenty-four. It has been

suggested, that the twelve yoke of oxen were not all attached to the

same plough, but that there were twelve ploughs, each with its single

yoke of oxen. This, however, was scarcely likely to be the case,

as it is definitely stated that Elisha "was ploughing with

twelve yoke of oxen before him, and he with the twelfth," and it

is much more probable that the land was heavy, and that, therefore,

the plough could not be properly worked without the additional force.

The instrument with which the cattle were driven was not a whip, but a

goad. This goad was a long and stout stick, armed with a spike at one

end, and having a kind of spud at the other, with which the earth

could be scraped off the share when it became clogged. Such an

instrument might readily be used as a weapon, and, in the hands of a

powerful man, might be made even more formidable than a spear. As a

weapon, it often was used, as we see from many passages of the

Scriptures. For example, it is said in Judges iii. 31, "that Shamgar

the son of Anath killed six hundred Philistines with an ox-goad."

Afterwards, in the beginning of Saul's reign, when the Israelites

fairly measured themselves against the Philistines, it was found that

only Saul and Jonathan were even tolerably armed. Fearful of the

numbers and spirit of the Israelites, the Philistines had disarmed

them, and were so cautious that they did not even allow them to

possess forges wherewith to make or sharpen the various agricultural

instruments which they possessed, lest they should surreptitiously

provide themselves with weapons. The only smith's tool which they were

allowed to retain was a file with which each man might trim the edges

of the ploughshares, mattocks, axes, and sharpen the points of the

goad. The only weapons which they could muster were made of their

agricultural implements, and among the most formidable of them was the

goad.

How the goad came into use in Palestine may easily be seen. The

Egyptians, from among whom the people of Israel passed into the

Promised Land, did not use the goad in ploughing, but the whip, which,

from the representations on the Egyptian monuments, was identical with

the koorbash, or "cow-hide" whip, which is now in use in the same

country. But this terrible whip, which is capable, when wielded by a

skilful hand, of cutting deep grooves through the tough hide of the

ox, could not be obtained by the Jews, because the hippopotamus, of

whose hide it was made, did not live in or near Palestine. They

therefore were forced to use some other instrument wherewith to urge

on the oxen, and the goad was clearly the simplest and most effective

implement for this purpose.

After the land was ploughed and sown, and the harvest was ripened, the

labours of the oxen were again called into requisition, first for

threshing out the corn, and next for carrying or drawing the grain to

the storehouses.

In the earlier days, the process of threshing was very simple. A

circular piece of ground was levelled, and beaten very hard and flat,

its diameter being from fifty to a hundred feet. On this ground the

corn was thrown, and a number of oxen were driven here and there on

it, so that the constant trampling of their feet shook the ripe grain

out of the ears. The corn was gathered together in the middle of the

floor, and as fast as it was scattered by the feet of the oxen, it was

thrown back towards the centre.

Afterwards, an improvement was introduced in the form of a rough

sledge, called "moreg," to which the oxen were harnessed by a yoke,

and on which the driver stood as he guided his team round the

threshing-floor. This instrument is mentioned in Isa. xli. 15:

"Behold, I will make thee anew and sharp threshing instrument having

teeth [or mouths]: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them

small, and shalt make the hills as chaff." Mention is also made of the

same implement in 2 Sam. xxiv. 22, where it is related that Araunah

the Jebusite offered to give David the oxen for a burnt-sacrifice, and

the moregs and other implements as wood with which they could be

burned.

The work of treading out the corn was a hard and trying one for the

oxen, and it was probably on this account that the kindly edict was

made, that the oxen who trod out the corn should not be muzzled. As a

rule, the cattle were not fed nearly as carefully as is done with us,

and so the labours of the threshing-floor would find a compensation in

the temporary abundance of which the animals might take their fill.

After the corn was threshed, or rather trodden out, the oxen had to

draw it home in carts. These were but slight improvements on the

threshing-sledge, and were simply trays or shallow boxes on a pair of

wheels. As the wheels were merely slices cut from the trunk of a tree,

and were not furnished with iron tires, they were not remarkable for

roundness, and indeed, after a little time, were worn into rather

irregular ovals, so that the task of dragging a cart over the rough

roads was by no means an easy one. And, as the axle was simply a stout

pole fastened to the bottom of the cart, and having its rounded ends

thrust through holes in the middle of the wheels, the friction was

enormous. As, moreover, oil and grease were far too precious luxuries

to be wasted in lubricating the axles, the creaking and groaning of

the wheels was a singularly disagreeable and ear-piercing sound.

[Illustration: TREADING OUT CORN.

"_Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the

corn._"--(DEUT. xxv. 4.)]

The common hackery of India is a good example of the carts mentioned

in the Scriptures. As with the plough, the cart was drawn by a couple

of oxen, connected by the yoke. The two kinds of cart, namely, the

tray and the box, are clearly indicated in the Scriptures. The new

cart on which the Ark was placed when it was sent back by the

Philistines (see 1 Sam. vi. 7) was evidently one of the former kind,

and so was that which was made twenty years afterwards, for the

purpose of conveying the Ark to Jerusalem.

The second kind of cart is mentioned by the Prophet Amos (ch. ii. 13),

"Behold, I am pressed under you, as a cart is pressed that is full of

sheaves," reference being evidently made to heaping up of the sheaves

in the cart, and pressing them down, as is done at the present day.

That oxen were also employed as beasts of burden is shown by the

passage in 1 Chron. xii. 40, "Moreover, they that were nigh them, even

unto Issachar, and Zebulun, and Napthali, brought bread on asses, and

on camels, and on mules, and on oxen."

Although the cattle were evidently better tended in the olden times

than at present, those animals which were used for agriculture seem to

have passed rather a rough life, especially in the winter time. It is

rather curious that the Jews should have had no idea of preserving the

grass by making it into hay, as is done in Europe. Consequently the

chief food of the cattle was the straw and chaff which remained on the

threshing-floor after the grain had been separated. See Isa. xxx. 23:

"In that day shall thy cattle feed in large pastures. The oxen

likewise, and the young asses that ear the ground shall eat clean

provender, which hath been winnowed with the shovel and with the fan."

This, indeed, was the only use to which the straw could be put, for it

was so crushed and broken by the feet of the oxen and the

threshing-sledge that it was rendered useless. Allusion is made to the

crushing of the straw in many passages of Scripture. See, for example,

Isa. xxv. 10, "Moab shall be trodden down [or threshed] under him,

even as straw is trodden down for the dunghill."

The want of winter forage is the chief reason why cattle are so

irregularly disposed over Palestine, many parts of that country being

entirely without them, and only those districts containing them in

which fresh forage may be found throughout the year.

Except a few yoke of oxen, which are kept in order to draw carts, and

act as beasts of burden, the cattle are turned loose for a

considerable portion of the year, and run about in herds from one

pasturage to another. Thus they regain many of the characteristics of

wild animals, and it is to this habit of theirs that many of the

Scriptural allusions can be traced.

For example, see Ps. xxii. 12, "Many bulls have compassed me, strong

bulls of Bashan have beset me round. They gaped on me with their

mouths [or, their mouths opened against me] as a ravening and a

roaring lion." This passage alludes to the curiosity inherent in

cattle, which have a habit of following objects which they do not

understand or dislike, and surrounding it with looks of grave

wonderment. Even in their domesticated state this habit prevails. When

I was a boy, I sometimes amused myself with going into a field where a

number of cows and oxen were grazing, and lying down in the middle of

it. The cattle would soon become uneasy, toss their heads about, and

gradually draw near on every side, until at last they would be pressed

together closely in a circle, with their heads just above the object

of their astonishment. Their curious, earnest looks have always been

present to my mind when reading the above quoted passage.

The Psalmist does not necessarily mean that the bulls in question were

dangerous animals. On the contrary, the bulls of Palestine are gentle

in comparison with our own animals, which are too often made savage by

confinement and the harsh treatment to which they are subjected by

rough and ignorant labourers. In Palestine a pair of bulls may

constantly be seen attached to the same yoke, a thing that never would

be seen in this country.

The custom of turning the herds of cattle loose to find pasture for

themselves is alluded to in Joel i. 18, "How do the beasts groan! the

herds of cattle are perplexed because they have no pasture." We can

easily imagine to ourselves the terrible time to which the prophet

refers, "when the rivers of waters are dried up, and the fire hath

devoured the pastures of the wilderness," as it is wont to do when a

spark falls upon grass dried up and withered, by reason of the sun's

heat and the lack of water. Over such a country, first withered by

drought, and then desolated by fire, would the cattle wander, vainly

searching on the dusty and blackened surface for the tender young

blades which always spring up on a burnt pasture as soon as the first

rains fall. Moaning and bellowing with thirst and disappointment,

they would vainly seek for food or water in places where the seed lies

still under the clods where it was sown (v. 17), where the vines are

dried up, and the fig, the pomegranate and the palm (v. 12) are all

withered for want of moisture.

Such scenes are still to be witnessed in several parts of the world.

Southern Africa is sometimes sadly conspicuous for them, an

exceptional season of drought keeping back the fresh grass after the

old pastures have been burned (the ordinary mode of cultivating

pasture land). Then the vast herds of cattle, whose milk forms the

staff of life to the inhabitants, wander to and fro, gathering in

masses round any spot where a spring still yields a little water, and

bellowing and moaning with thirst as they press their way towards the

spot where their owners are doling out to each a small measure of the

priceless fluid.

The cattle are branded with the mark of their owners, so that in these

large herds there might be no difficulty in distinguishing them when

they were re-captured for the plough and the cart. On one of the

Egyptian monuments there is a very interesting group, which has

furnished the idea for the plate which illustrates this article. It

occurs in the tombs of the kings at Thebes, and represents a ploughing

scene. The simple two-handled plough is being dragged by a pair of

cows, who have the yoke fastened across the horns instead of lying on

the neck, and a sower is following behind, scattering the grain out of

a basket into the newly-made furrows. In front of the cows is a young

calf, which has run to meet its mother, and is leaping for joy before

her as she steadily plods along her course.

The action of both animals is admirably represented; the steady and

firm gait of the mother contrasting with the light, gambolling step

and arched tail of her offspring. Both are branded with the same mark,

namely, three equal-armed crosses, one on the haunch, another on the

side, and a third on the neck. The driver carries the whip, or

koorbash, which has been already mentioned, and which is familiar to

travellers in Southern Africa under the title of "sjambok."

In the olden times of the Israelitish race, herd-keeping was

considered as an honourable occupation, in which men of the highest

rank might engage without any derogation to their dignity. We find,

for instance, that Saul himself, even after he had been appointed

king, was acting as herdsman when the people saw the mistake they had

made in rejecting him as their monarch, and came to fetch their

divinely-appointed leader from his retirement. (See 1 Sam. xi. 5.)

Doeg, too, the faithful companion of Saul, was made the chief herdsman

of his master's cattle, so that for Saul to confer such an office, and

Doeg to accept it, shows that the post was one of much honour. And

afterwards, when David was in the zenith of his power, he completed

the organization of his kingdom, portioning out not only his army into

battalions, and assigning a commanding officer to each battalion, but

also appointing a ruler to each tribe, and setting officers over his

treasury, over the vineyards, over the olive-trees, over the

storehouses, and over the cattle. And these offices were so important

that the names of their holders are given at length in 1 Chron. xxvii.

those of the various herdsmen being thought as worthy of mention as

those of the treasurers, the military commanders, or the headmen of

the tribes.

Before concluding this necessarily short account of the domesticated

oxen of Palestine, it will be needful to give a few lines to the

animal viewed in a religious aspect. Here we have, in bold contrast to

each other, the divine appointment of certain cattle to be slain as

sacrifices, and the reprobation of worship paid to those very cattle

as living emblems of divinity. This false worship was learned by the

Israelites during their long residence in Egypt, and so deeply had the

customs of the Egyptian religion sunk into their hearts, that they

were not eradicated after the lapse of centuries. It may easily be

imagined that such a superstition, surrounded as it was with every

external circumstance which could make it more imposing, would take a

powerful hold of the Jewish mind.

Chief among the multitude of idols or symbols was the god Apis,

represented by a bull. Many other animals, specially the cat and the

ibis, were deeply honoured among the ancient Egyptians, as we learn

from their own monuments and from the works of the old historians. All

these creatures were symbols as well as idols, symbols to the educated

and idols to the ignorant.

None of them was held in such universal honour as the bull Apis. The

particular animal which represented the deity, and which was lodged

with great state and honour in his temple at Memphis, was thought to

be divinely selected for the purpose, and to be impressed with certain

marks. His colour must be black, except a square spot on the forehead,

a crescent-shaped white spot on the right side, and the figure of an

eagle on his back. Under the tongue must be a knob shaped like the

sacred scarabæus, and the hairs of his tail must be double.

This representative animal was only allowed to live for a certain

time, and when he had reached this allotted period, he was taken in

solemn procession to the Nile, and drowned in its sacred waters. His

body was then embalmed, and placed with great state in the tombs at

Memphis.

After his death, whether natural or not, the whole nation went into

mourning, and exhibited all the conventional signs of sorrow, until

the priests found another bull which possessed the distinctive marks.

The people then threw off their mourning robes, and appeared in their

best attire, and the sacred bull was exhibited in state for forty days

before he was taken to his temple at Memphis. The reader will here

remember the analogous case of the Indian cattle, some of which are

held to be little less than incarnations of divinity.

Even at the very beginning of the exodus, when their minds must have

been filled with the many miracles that had been wrought in their

behalf, and with the cloud and fire of Sinai actually before their

eyes, Aaron himself made an image of a calf in gold, and set it up as

a symbol of the Lord. That the idol in question was intended as a

symbol by Aaron is evident from the words which he used when summoning

the people to worship, "To-morrow is a feast of the Lord" (Gen. xxxii.

5). The people, however, clearly lacked the power of discriminating

between the symbol and that which it represented, and worshipped the

image just as any other idol might be worshipped. And, in spite of the

terrible and swift punishment that followed, and which showed the

profanity of the act, the idea of ox-worship still remained among the

people.

Five hundred years afterwards we find a familiar example of it in the

conduct of Jeroboam, "who made Israel to sin," the peculiar crime

being the open resuscitation of ox-worship. "The king made two calves

of gold and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to

Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of

the land of Egypt. And he set the one in Bethel, and the other put he

in Dan.... And he made an house of high places, and made priests of

the lowest of the people, which were not of the tribe of Levi. And

Jeroboam ordained a feast ... like unto the feast in Judah, and he

offered upon the altar. So did he in Bethel, sacrificing unto the

calves that he had made."

Here we have a singular instance of a king of Israel repeating, after

a lapse of five hundred years, the very acts which had drawn down on

the people so severe a punishment, and which were so contrary to the

law that they had incited Moses to fling down and break the sacred

tables on which the commandments had been divinely inscribed. Nothing

is omitted: the shape of the idol, the material of which it is

composed, the offerings, and the very words in which Aaron had so

deeply sinned, "Behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out

of the land of Egypt." Successive monarchs followed his example, and,

according to the graphic words of Scripture, they "departed not from

the ways of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin."

As was likely to be the case in a land where cattle were of such

importance, and often formed the principal wealth of the inhabitants,

many words were in use to distinguish the cattle according to sex,

age, and number. Thus, Bakar signifies the adult animal of either sex,

the test of full growth being fitness for the plough. Consequently,

Ben-Baka, or son of the herd, signifies a male calf, and Aiglah-Bakar,

a female calf. The term Bakar is derived from a Hebrew word signifying

to cleave or plough, and hence it is used as to signify those animals

which are old enough to be put to the plough.

Then there is the word Shor, or Tor, to signify a single head of

cattle, of any age, or of either sex. The second form of this word is

familiar to us in the Latin word "taurus," and the English "steer."

There are several other words, such as Par, a young bull, and Parah, a

heifer, which do not need explanation.

Another species of the ox-tribe now inhabits Palestine, though

commentators rather doubt whether it is not a comparatively late

importation. This is the true BUFFALO (_Bubalus buffelus_, Gray),

which is spread over a very large portion of the earth, and is very

plentiful in India. In that country there are two distinct breeds of

the Buffalo, namely, the Arnee, a wild variety, and the Bhainsa, a

tamed variety. The former animal is much larger than the latter, being

sometimes more than ten feet in length from the nose to the root of

the tail, and measuring between six and seven feet in height at the

shoulder. Its horns are of enormous length, the tail is very short,

and tufts of hair grow on the forehead and horns. The tamed variety is

at least one-third smaller, and, unlike the Arnee, never seems to get

into high condition. It is an ugly, ungainly kind of beast, and is

rendered very unprepossessing to the eye by the bald patches which are

mostly found upon its hide.

[Illustration: THE BUFFALO.]

Being a water-loving animal, the Buffalo always inhabits the low-lying

districts, and is fond of wallowing in the oozy marshes in which it

remains for hours, submerged all but its head, and tranquilly chewing

the cud while enjoying its mud-bath. While thus engaged the animal

depresses its horns so that they are scarcely visible, barely allowing

more than its eyes, ears, and nostrils to remain above the surface, so

that the motionless heads are scarcely distinguishable from the grass

and reed tufts which stud the marshes. Nothing is more startling to an

inexperienced traveller than to pass by a silent and tranquil pool

where the muddy surface is unbroken except by a number of black lumps

and rushy tufts, and then to see these tufts suddenly transformed into

twenty or thirty huge beasts rising out of the still water as if by

magic. Generally, the disturber of their peace had better make the

best of his way out of their reach, as the Buffalo, whether wild or

tame, is of a tetchy and irritable nature, and resents being startled

out of its state of dreamy repose.

In the Jordan valley the Buffalo is found, and is used for

agriculture, being of the Bhainsa, or domesticated variety. Being much

larger and stronger than the ordinary cattle, it is useful in drawing

the plough, but its temper is too uncertain to render it a pleasant

animal to manage. As is the case with all half-wild cattle, its milk

is very scanty, but compensates by the richness of the quality for the

lack of quantity.

THE WILD BULL.

The Tô, Wild Bull of the Old Testament--Passages in which it is

mentioned--The Wild Bull in the net--Hunting with nets in the

East--The Oryx supposed to be the Tô of Scripture--Description

of the Oryx, its locality, appearance, and habits--The points in

which the Oryx agrees with the Tô--The "snare" in which the foot

is taken, as distinguished from the net.

In two passages of the Old Testament an animal is mentioned,

respecting which the translators and commentators have been somewhat

perplexed, in one passage being translated as the "Wild Ox," and in

the other as the "Wild Bull." In the Jewish Bible the same rendering

is preserved, but the sign of doubt is added to the word in both

cases, showing that the translation is an uncertain one.

The first of these passages occurs in Deut. xiv. 5, where it is

classed together with the ox, sheep, goats, and other ruminants, as

one of the beasts which were lawful for food. Now, although we cannot

identify it by this passage, we can at all events ascertain two

important points--the first, that it was a true ruminant, and the

second, that it was not the ox, the sheep, or the goat. It was,

therefore, some wild ruminant, and we now have to ask how we are to

find out the species.

If we turn to Isa. li. 20, we shall find a passage which will help us

considerably. Addressing Jerusalem, the prophet uses these words, "By

whom shall I comfort thee? Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head

of all the streets, as a wild bull in a net; they are full of the fury

of the Lord, the rebuke of thy God." We now see that the Tô or Teô

must be an animal which is captured by means of nets, and therefore

must inhabit spots wherein the toils can be used. Moreover, it is

evidently a powerful animal, or the force of the simile would be lost.

The prophet evidently refers to some large and strong beast which has

been entangled in the hunter's nets, and which lies helplessly

struggling in them. We are, therefore, almost perforce driven to

recognise it as some large antelope.

The expression used by the prophet is so characteristic that it needs

a short explanation. In this country, and at the present day, the use

of the net is almost entirely restricted to fishing and bird-catching;

but in the East nets are still employed in the capture of very large

game.

A brief allusion to the hunting-net is made at page 27, but, as the

passage in Isaiah li. requires a more detailed account of this mode of

catching large animals, it will be as well to describe the sport as at

present practised in the East.

When a king or some wealthy man determines to hunt game without taking

much trouble himself, he gives orders to his men to prepare their

nets, which vary in size or strength according to the particular

animal for which they are intended. If, for example, only the wild

boar and similar animals are to be hunted, the nets need not be of

very great width; but for agile creatures, such as the antelope, they

must be exceedingly wide, or the intended prey will leap over them. As

the net is much used in India for the purpose of catching game,

Captain Williamson's description of it will explain many of the

passages of Scripture wherein it is mentioned.

The material of the net is hemp, twisted loosely into a kind of rope,

and the mode in which it is formed is rather peculiar. The meshes are

not knotted together, but only twisted round each other, much after

the fashion of the South American hammocks, so as to obtain

considerable elasticity, and to prevent a powerful animal from

snapping the cord in its struggles. Some of these nets are thirteen

feet or more in width, and even such a net as this has been overleaped

by a herd of antelopes. Their length is variable, but, as they can be

joined in any number when set end to end, the length is not so

important as the width.

The mode of setting the nets is singularly ingenious. When a suitable

spot has been selected, the first care of the hunters is to stretch a

rope as tightly as possible along the ground. For this purpose stout

wooden stakes or truncheons are sunk crosswise in the earth, and

between these the rope is carefully strained. The favourite locality

of the net is a ravine, through which the animals can be driven so as

to run against the net in their efforts to escape, and across the

ravine a whole row of these stakes is sunk. The net is now brought to

the spot, and its lower edge fastened strongly to the ground rope.

The strength of this mode of fastening is astonishing, and, although

the stakes are buried scarcely a foot below the surface, they cannot

be torn up by any force which can be applied to them; and, however

strong the rope may be, it would be broken before the stakes could be

dragged out of the ground.

A smaller rope is now attached to the upper edge of the net, which is

raised upon a series of slight poles. It is not stretched quite

tightly, but droops between each pair of poles, so that a net which is

some thirteen feet in width will only give nine or ten feet of clear

height when the upper edge is supported on the poles. These latter are

not fixed in the ground, but merely held in their places by the weight

of the net resting upon them.

When the nets have been properly set, the beaters make a wide circuit

through the country, gradually advancing towards the fatal spot, and

driving before them all the wild animals that inhabit the

neighbourhood. As soon as any large beast, such, for example, as an

antelope, strikes against the net, the supporting pole falls, and the

net collapses upon the unfortunate animal, whose struggles--especially

if he be one of the horned animals--only entangle him more and more in

the toils.

As soon as the hunters see a portion of the net fall, they run to the

spot, kill the helpless creature that lies enveloped in the elastic

meshes, drag away the body, and set up the net again in readiness for

the next comer. Sometimes the line of nets will extend for half a mile

or more, and give employment to a large staff of hunters, in killing

the entangled animals, and raising afresh those portions of the net

which had fallen.

Allusions to this mode of hunting are plentiful in the Old Testament.

Take, for example, Job xviii. 7: "The steps of his strength shall be

straitened, and his own counsel shall cast him down; for he is cast

into a net by his own feet, and he walketh upon a snare." And again in

the next chapter, ver. 6, "Know now that God hath overthrown me, and

hath compassed me with His net," in which is depicted forcibly the

helpless state of one on whom the net has fallen, and who is lying on

the ground vainly struggling in the meshes.

See also Ps. lvii. 6, "They have prepared a net for my steps, my soul

is bowed down;" and Ps. lxvi. 11, "Thou broughtest us into the net,

thou laidest affliction upon our loins." In the prophet Ezekiel are

several passages which refer to the hunting net, and make especial

mention of the manner in which it falls over its victim. One of these

occurs in chap. xii. 13, "My net also will I spread upon him, and he

shall be taken in my snare." Again in chap. xix. 8, "Then the nations

set against him on every side from the provinces, and spread their net

over him" In this passage a forcible allusion is made to the manner in

which the wild animal is surrounded by the hunters, who surround and

gradually close in upon them, as they drive their victims into the

toils. The same combination of the hunters is also referred to by the

prophet Micah, vii. 2, "There is none upright among men: they all lie

in wait for blood; they hunt every man his brother with a net."

[Illustration: WILD BULL, OR ORYX.

"_They lie at the head of all the streets, like a wild bull in a

net._"--ISAIAH li. 21.]

Accepting the theory that the Tô is one of the large antelopes that

inhabit, or used to inhabit, the Holy Land and its neighbourhood, we

may safely conjecture that it may signify the beautiful animal known

as the ORYX (_Oryx leucoryx_), an animal which has a tolerably wide

range, and is even now found on the borders of the Holy Land. It is a

large and powerful antelope, and is remarkable for its beautiful

horns, which sometimes exceed a yard in length, and sweep in a most

graceful curve over the back.

Sharp as they are, and evidently formidable weapons, the manner in

which they are set on the head renders them apparently unserviceable

for combat. When, however, the Oryx is brought to bay, or wishes to

fight, it stoops its head until the nose is close to the ground, the

points of the horns being thus brought to the front. As the head is

swung from side to side, the curved horns sweep through a considerable

space, and are so formidable that even the lion is chary of attacking

their owner. Indeed, instances are known where the lion has been

transfixed and killed by the horns of the Oryx. Sometimes the animal

is not content with merely standing to repel the attacks of its

adversaries, but suddenly charges forward with astonishing rapidity,

and strikes upwards with its horns as it makes the leap.

But these horns, which can be used with such terrible effect in

battle, are worse than useless when the animal is hampered in the net.

In vain does the Oryx attempt its usual defence: the curved horns get

more and more entangled in the elastic meshes, and become a source of

weakness rather than strength. We see now how singularly appropriate

is the passage, "Thy sons lie at the heads of all the streets, as a

wild bull (or Oryx) in a net," and how completely the force of the

metaphor is lost without a knowledge of the precise mode of fixing the

nets, of driving the animals into them, and of the manner in which

they render even the large and powerful animals helpless.

The height of the Oryx at the shoulder is between three and four feet,

and its colour is greyish white, mottled profusely with black and

brown in bold patches. It is plentiful in Northern Africa, and, like

many other antelopes, lives in herds, so that it is peculiarly suited

to that mode of hunting which consists in surrounding a number of

animals, and driving them into a trap of some kind, whether a fenced

enclosure, a pitfall, or a net.

There is, by the way, the term "snare," which is specially used with

especial reference to catching the foot as distinguished from the net

which enveloped the whole body. For example, in Job xviii. 8, "He is

cast into a net, he walketh on a snare," where a bold distinction is

drawn between the two and their mode of action. And in ver. 10, "The

snare is laid for him in the ground." Though I would not state

definitely that such is the case, I believe that the snare which is

here mentioned is one which is still used in several parts of the

world.

It is simply a hoop, to the inner edge of which are fastened a number

of elastic spikes, the points being directed towards the centre. This

is merely laid in the path which the animal will take, and is tied by

a short cord to a log of wood. As the deer or antelope treads on the

snare, the foot passes easily through the elastic spikes, but, when

the foot is raised, the spikes run into the joint and hold the hoop

upon the limb. Terrified by the check and the sudden pang, the animal

tries to run away, but, by the united influence of sharp spikes and

the heavy log, it is soon forced to halt, and so becomes an easy prey

to its pursuers.

THE REÊM, OR "UNICORN" OF SCRIPTURE.

The Reêm evidently known to the Jews--Various theories

concerning the Unicorn--Supposed identity with the Indian

Rhinoceros--Passages of Scripture alluding to the strength,

violent and intractable temper of the Reêm--The Reêm a

two-horned animal--Its evident connection with the Ox tribe--Its

presumed identity with the now extinct Urus--Mr. Dawkins'

treatise on the Urus--Enormous size and dangerous character of

the Urus--Rabbinical legend of the Reêm--Identity of the Urus

with the modern varieties of cattle--The Bull hunts of Nineveh.

There are many animals mentioned in the Scriptures which cannot be

identified with any certainty, partly because their names occur only

once or twice in the sacred writings, and partly because, when they

are mentioned, the context affords no clue to their identity by giving

any hint as to their appearance or habits. In such cases, although the

translators would have done better if they had simply given the Hebrew

word without endeavouring to identify it with any known animal, they

may be excused for committing errors in their nomenclature. There is

one animal, however, for which no such excuse can be found, and this

is the Reêm of Scripture, translated as Unicorn in the authorized

version.

Now the word Reêm is mentioned seven times in the Old Testament, and

is found, not in one, but several books, showing that it was an animal

perfectly well known to those for whom the sacred books were written.

It is twice mentioned in the Pentateuch, several times in the Psalms,

once in the book of Job, once by Isaiah, and reference is once made to

it in the historical books. In these various passages, abundant

details are given of its aspect and habits, so that there is very

little doubt as to the identity of the animal.

The Septuagint translates Reêm by the word Monoceros, or the

One-horned, which has been transferred to the Vulgate by the term

Unicornis, a word having the same signification.

In an age when scientific investigation was utterly neglected, such a

translation would readily be accepted without cavil, and there is no

doubt that the generality of those who read the passages in question

accepted them as referring to the Unicorn of heraldry with which we,

as Englishmen, are so familiar. I may perhaps mention briefly that

such an animal is a physiological impossibility, and that the Unicorn

of the fables was a mere compound of an antelope, a horse, and a

narwhal. The tusks or teeth of the narwhal were in former days

exhibited as horns of the Unicorn, and so precious were they that one

of them was laid up in the cathedral of St. Denis, and two in the

treasury of St. Mark's at Venice, all of which were exhibited in the

year 1658 as veritable Unicorns' horns.

The physiological difficulty above mentioned seems to have troubled

the minds of the old writers, who saw that an ivory horn had no

business to grow upon the junction of the two bones of the skull, and

yet felt themselves bound to acknowledge that such an animal did

really exist. They therefore put themselves to vast trouble in

accounting for such a phenomenon, and, in their determination to

believe in the animal, invented theories nearly as wonderful as the

existence of the Unicorn itself.

One of these theories, arguing that the two horns may be as easily

fused together as the hoofs, is stated as follows. "Because the middle

is equally distant from both the extremes; and the hoof of this beast

may be well said to be cloven and whole, because the horn is of the

substance of the hoof, and the hoof of the substance of the horn, and

therefore the horn is whole and the hoof cloven; for the cleaving

either of the horn or of the hoof cometh from the defect of nature,

and therefore God hath given to horses and asses whole hoofs, because

there is greatest use of their legs, but unto Unicorns a whole and

entire horn, that, as the ease of man is procured by the help of

horses, so the health of them is procured by the horn of the Unicorn."

This last sentence refers to the then universal belief, that the horn

of the Unicorn was a panacea for all illness and an antidote to all

poisons. It was thought to be so sensitive, that if a poisoned cup

were but brought near it a thick moisture would exude from its

surface, and if fragments were thrown into the cup they would cause

the liquid to swell and bubble, and at last to boil over. This

supposed virtue forms the basis of an argument used by one of the

writers on the subject, and, as the passage affords a good example of

theological argument in 1658, it will be given entire.

After enumerating various animals (and, by the way, once actually

hitting upon the "fish called Monoceros," _i.e._ the narwhal), the

writer proceeds as follows, in the quaint and nervous English of his

time: "Now our discourse of the Unicorn is of none of these beasts,

for there is not any virtue attributed to their horns, and therefore

the vulgar sort of infidel people, which scarcely believe any herb but

such as they see in their own gardens, or any beast but such as is in

their own flocks, or any knowledge but such as is bred in their own

brains, or any birds which are not hatched in their own nests, have

never made question of these; but of the true Unicorn, whereof there

were more proofs in the world, because of the nobleness of his horn,

they have ever been in doubt. By which distinction it appeareth unto

me that there is some secret enemy in the inward degenerate nature of

man, which continually blindeth the eyes of God His people, from

beholding and believing the greatness of God His works.

"But to the purpose: that there is such a beast, the Scripture itself

witnesseth, for _David_ thus speaketh in the 92d Psalm, _Et erigetur

cornu meus tanquam Monocerotis_. That is, 'My horn shall be lifted up

like the horn of a Unicorn.' Whereupon all divines that ever wrote

have not only collected that there is a Unicorn, but also affirm the

similitude to be betwixt the kingdom of _David_ and the horn of the

Unicorn, that as the horn of the Unicorn is wholesome to all beasts

and creatures, so should be the kingdom of David to the generation of

Christ.

"And do we think that _David_ would compare the vertue of his kingdom

and the powerful redemption of the world, unto a thing that is not, or

is uncertain, or is fantastical? God forbid that ever any man should

so do despight to the Holy Ghost. For this cause we read also in

_Suidas_, that good men who worship God and follow His laws are

compared to Unicorns, whose greater parts, as their whole bodies, are

unprofitable and untameable, yet their horn maketh them excellent; so

in good men, although their fleshy parts be good for nothing, and fall

down to the earth, yet their grace and piety exalteth their souls to

the heavens."

In late years, after the true origin of the Unicorn's horn was

discovered, and the belief in its many virtues abandoned, the Reêm, or

Monoceros, was almost unhesitatingly identified with the rhinoceros of

India, and for a long time this theory was the accepted one. It is

now, however, certain that the Reêm was not the rhinoceros, and that

it can be almost certainly identified with an animal which, at the

time when the passages in question were written, was plentiful in

Palestine, although, like the lion, it is now extinct.

We will now take in their order the seven passages in which the animal

is mentioned, substituting the word Reêm for Unicorn.

The first of these passages occurs in Numbers xxiii., where the

remarkable prophecies of Balaam are recorded. "The Lord his God is

with them, and the shout of a king is among them. God brought them out

of Egypt, he hath as it were the strength of Reêm:" (ver. 21, 22).

From this passage we gain one piece of information, namely, that the

Reêm was an exceptionally powerful animal. Indeed, it was evidently

the strongest animal that was known to the prophet and his hearers, or

it would not have been mentioned as a visible type of Divine power.

Next we come to Deut. xxxiii., wherein another prophecy is revealed,

namely, that of Moses, just before his death and mysterious burial.

Speaking of Joseph and his tribe, the aged prophet uses these words,

"Let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of

the head of him that was separated from his brethren. His glory is

like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of

Reêm: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the

earth; and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the

thousands of Manasseh" (ver. 16, 17).

In this passage we gather more information. In the first place it is

to be noticed that the Reêm is mentioned in connexion with the

domestic cattle, and that the name is used as one that is familiar to

the hearers. Next, as the marginal reading gives the word, Reêm is

used in the singular and not in the plural number, so that the passage

may be read, "his horns are like the horns of a Unicorn." Thus we come

to the important point that the Reêm was not a one-horned, but a

two-horned animal.

It may here be remarked that the Reêm horns were the emblem of the two

tribes that sprung from Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, himself being

typified by the Reêm, and his two powerful sons by the horns.

Next, in the Psalms, we find that the powerful, two-horned Reêm was

also a dangerous and violent animal. (See Psa. xxii. 19, 21.)

"Be not Thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste Thee to help

me.

"Deliver my soul from the sword, my darling from the power (or the

hand) of the dog.

"Save me from the lion's mouth: for Thou hast heard me from the horns

of Reêm."

In Ps. xcii. there is another allusion to the powerful horns of the

Reêm. "For lo, Thine enemies, O Lord, for lo, Thine enemies shall

perish; all the workers of iniquity shall be scattered. But my horn

shalt Thou exalt like the horn of Reêm."

From these passages we gather the following important points. First,

the Reêm was an animal familiar to the people of Palestine, as is

evident from the manner in which its name is introduced into the

sacred writings; secondly, it was the most powerful animal known to

the Israelites; thirdly, it was a two-horned animal; fourthly, it was

a savage and dangerous beast; and fifthly, it had some connexion with

the domesticated cattle.

This last-mentioned point is brought out more strongly in the

remaining passages of Scripture. In Job, for example, a parallel is

drawn between the wild and untameable Reêm and the beasts of draught

and burden.

In that magnificent series of passages in which the Lord answers Job

out of the whirlwind, and which indeed are a worthy sequel to Elihu's

impassioned discourse on the text that "God is greater than man," the

wild animals are mentioned in evident contrast to the tame. First come

the wild goats of the rock; then the wild ass, who "scorneth the

multitude of the city, neither regardeth the crying of the driver;"

and then the Reêm, which is clearly contrasted with the tamed ox.

"Will Reêm be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou

bind Reêm with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys

after thee? Wilt thou trust him, because his strength is great? or

wilt thou leave thy labour to him? Wilt thou believe him that he will

bring home thy seed, and gather it in thy barn?" See chap. xxxix.

9-12.

Now in these passages, the principal duties of the domesticated cattle

are described--the ploughing the furrow, the drawing of the harrow,

and the carrying home of the ripened corn, for all which purposes the

tameless spirit of Reêm renders him useless, in spite of his vast

strength. The prophet Isaiah has a passage in which the Reêm is

evidently classed with the ox tribe. See chap. xxxiv. 6, 7.

"The sword of the Lord is filled with blood; it is made fat with

fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the fat of the

kidneys of rams: for the Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great

slaughter in the land of Idumea. And Reêm shall come down with them,

and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with

blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."

The last passage in which reference is made to this animal is in Ps.

xxix. 5, 6.

"The voice of the Lord breaketh the cedars; yea, the Lord breaketh the

cedars of Lebanon. He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon

and Sirion like a young Reêm."

On turning to the Jewish Bible we find that the word Reêm is

translated as buffalo, and there is no doubt that this rendering is

nearly the correct one, and at the present day naturalists are nearly

all agreed that the Reêm of the Old Testament must have been the now

extinct Urus. A smaller animal, the Bonassus or Bison, also existed

in Palestine, and even to the present day continues to maintain itself

in one or two spots, though it will probably be as soon completely

erased from the surface of the earth as its gigantic congener.

That the Reêm was one of the two animals is certain, and that it was

the larger is nearly as certain. The reason for deciding upon the Urus

is, that its horns were of great size and strength, and therefore

agree with the description of the Reêm; whereas those of the Bonassus,

although powerful, are short, and not conspicuous enough to deserve

the notice which is taken of them by the sacred writers.

Of the extinct variety we know but little. We do know, however, that

it was a huge and most formidable animal, as is evident from the

skulls and other bones which have been discovered.

Hitherto there has been considerable difficulty in treating of the

ancient Urus, on account of the great confusion which existed in the

various synonyms that were given to the animal. The tangled skein has,

however, been carefully unravelled by Mr. W. Boyd Dawkins, M.A.,

F.R.S., who has published an exceedingly valuable paper on the subject

in the _Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society_, March 21, 1866.

After describing the general character of the Urus, he proceeds to

remark: "The synonyms of the _Bos Urus_ are in a state of very great

confusion, arising from the fact that the two words denoting two

distinct species, the Urox and the Aurochs, are derived from the same

Sanscrit root, _Ur_, _Aur_, or _Or_, that signifies a forest, or sandy

waste. The root can be traced through many languages, and still

survives in the Greek [Greek: _horos_] (a mountain), the Norwegian

_Ore_, the Icelandic _Ure_ (the stony desert surrounding the base of

the mountains); and is preserved without change in the old German _Ur_

(a forest), and in _Ur_ of the Chaldees. It appears also in the Ural

Mountains, and also in the canton of _Uri_, the crest of which is an

ox-head." It is worthy of mention that, in the last-mentioned place,

when new magistrates are elected, two ancient and gigantic horns,

remarkable for their double curvature, are carried in solemn

procession.

The presence of these horns affords a remarkable confirmation to a

well-known passage in Julius Cæsars familiar "Commentaries." "The Uri

are little inferior to elephants in size" ("magnitudine paullo infra

elephantos"); "but are bulls in their nature, colour, and figure.

Great is their strength, and great their swiftness; nor do they spare

man or beast when they have caught sight of them. These, when trapped

in pitfalls, the hunters diligently kill. The youths, exercising

themselves by this sort of hunting, are hardened by the toil; and

those among them who have killed most, bringing with them the horns as

testimonials, acquire great praise. But these Uri cannot be habituated

to man or made tractable, not even when young. The great size of the

horns, as well as the form and quality of them, differ much from the

horns of our oxen. These, when carefully selected, they ring round the

edge with silver, and use them for drinking cups at their ample

feasts."

The enormous size of the horns of an ox which was in all probability

the Urus is mentioned by another writer, who also alludes to their use

as drinking vessels. He states that some of these horns were so large

as to hold about four gallons, and then proceeds to remark that their

primitive use as drinking-cups was the reason why Bacchus was

represented as wearing horns, and was sometimes worshipped under the

form of a bull.

It is worthy of notice, that the Sanscrit root _Ur_ is retained in the

name of the enormous Indian ox, the Gaur, a term which is formed from

two words, namely, Gau, or Ghoo, a cow, and Ur, so that the name

signifies Wild Cow.

As to the size of the animal Urus, it is evident, by measurement of

certain remains, that it must have well deserved Cæsar's comparison

with the elephant. A skull that is described by Cuvier gave the

following measurements. Width of skull between the bases of the

horn-cores (_i.e._ the bony projections on which the hollow horns are

set), rather more than twelve inches and an half. Circumference of the

cores at the base, twelve inches and nine-tenths. Length of the cores,

twenty-seven inches and nine-tenths; and distances between their tips,

thirty-two inches and a half.

According to the proportions of the domesticated ox, these

measurements indicated that the animal was twelve feet in length, and

six feet and a half in height. Now, if the reader will sketch out on a

wall an ox of these dimensions, he will appreciate the enormous

dimensions of the ancient Urus, far better than can be done by merely

reading figures in a book.

But this animal, gigantic as it was, is not the largest specimen that

has been discovered. A portion of an Urus skull was discovered in the

Avon, at Melksham, near Bath, the horn-cores of which, as described by

Mr. H. Woods, were seventeen inches and a half in circumference,

thirty-six inches and a half in length, and the distance from tip to

tip was thirty-nine inches. Taking the same proportions as those of

the ordinary ox, the author shows that the skull in question belonged

to an animal very much larger than that which was described by Cuvier.

In another specimen the distance between the tips of the horn-cores

was forty-two inches, but their length only thirty-six.

Of course, the size of the horn-cores gives little indication of the

dimensions of the horns themselves, and the principal point to be

noticed is the shape of the core, which in some specimens, though not

in all, instead of presenting the regular double curvature with which

we are so familiar in our domestic oxen, first curves outwards, then

bends backwards or a little downwards and forwards. This peculiarity

in the shape of the horns is specially noted by Cæsar, and we may

therefore receive with more security his account of their enormous

size.

A curious rabbinical legend of the Reêm is given in Lewysohn's

"Zoologie des Talmuds." When the ark was complete, and all the beasts

were commanded to enter, the Reêm was unable to do so, because it was

too large to pass through the door. Noah and his sons therefore were

obliged to tie the animal by a rope to the ark, and to tow it behind;

and, in order to prevent it from being strangled, they tied the rope,

not round its neck, but to its horn.

The same writer very justly remarks that the Scriptural and Talmudical

accounts of the Reêm have one decided distinction. The Scripture

speaks chiefly of its fierceness, its untameable nature, its strength,

and its swiftness, as its principal characteristics, while the Talmud

speaks almost exclusively of its size. It was evidently the largest

animal of which the writers had ever heard, and, according to Oriental

wont, they exaggerated it preposterously. Whenever the Talmudical

writers treat of animals with which they are personally acquainted,

they are simple, straightforward, and accurate. But, as soon as they

come to animals unknown to them except by hearsay, they go off into

the wildest extravagances, such, for example, as asserting that the

leopard is a hybrid between the wild boar and the lioness. The

exaggerated statements concerning the Reêm show therefore that the

animal must have been extinct long before the time of the writers.

The question now arises, What is the distinction between the ancient

Urus and our modern cattle? The answer is simple enough. The

difference in the shape of the horn-cores is, as has been shown, not

characteristic of the animal in general, but only of certain

individuals; while other variations in the shape and length of certain

bones are of too little consequence to be accepted as bases whereon to

found a new genus or even species, and we may therefore assume that

the Urus of Cæsar, the Reêm of Scripture, was nothing more than a very

large variety of the ox, modified of course in aspect and habits by

the locality in which it lived. This assumption is strengthened by the

fact that Mr. Dawkins, in the treatise to which reference has already

been made, has "traced the gigantic Urus from the earliest Pleistocene

times through the pre-historic period at least as far as the twelfth

century after Christ."

The reader may remember that in Cæsar's brief but graphic account of

the Urus, he mentions that it was hunted by those who wished to

distinguish themselves. Now, on many of the sculptures of Nineveh,

there are delineations of bull hunts, which show, as Mr. Layard justly

observes, that the wild bull appears to have been considered scarcely

less formidable and noble game than the lion. The king himself is

shown as attacking it, while the warriors partake of the sport either

mounted or on foot.

The exact variety of the wild bull which is being chased is not very

recognisable. It certainly is not the ordinary domestic animal, the

shape approaching somewhat to that of the antelope. The body is

covered with marks which are evidently intended to represent hair,

though it does not follow that the hair need be thick and shaggy like

that of the bison tribe.

THE BISON.

The Bison tribe and its distinguishing marks--Its former

existence in Palestine--Its general habits--Origin of its

name--Its musky odour--Size and speed of the Bison--Its

dangerous character when brought to bay--Its defence against the

wolf--Its untameable disposition.

A few words are now needful respecting the second animal which has

been mentioned in connexion with the Reêm; namely, the Bison, or

Bonassus. The Bisons are distinguishable from ordinary cattle by the

thick and heavy mane which covers the neck and shoulders, and which is

more conspicuous in the male than in the female. The general coating

of the body is also rather different, being thick and woolly instead

of lying closely to the skin like that of the other oxen. The Bison

certainly inhabited Palestine, as its bones have been found in that

country. It has, however, been extinct in the Holy Land for many

years, and, not being an animal that is capable of withstanding the

encroachments of man, it has gradually died out from the greater part

of Europe and Asia, and is now to be found only in a very limited

locality, chiefly in a Lithuanian forest, where it is strictly

preserved, and in some parts of the Caucasus. There it still preserves

the habits which made its ancient and gigantic relative so dangerous

an animal. Unlike the buffalo, which loves the low-lying and marshy

lands, the Bison prefers the high wooded localities, where it lives in

small troops.

Its name of Bison is a modification of the word Bisam, or musk, which

was given to it on account of the strong musky odour of its flesh,

which is especially powerful about the head and neck. This odour is

not so unpleasant as might be supposed, and those who have had

personal experience of the animal say that it bears some resemblance

to the perfume of violets. It is developed most strongly in the adult

bulls, the cows and young male calves only possessing it in a slight

degree.

[Illustration: BISON KILLING WOLF.

"_Will the unicorn he willing to serve thee?_"--JOB xxxix. 9.]

It is a tolerably large animal, being about six feet high at the

shoulder--a stature nearly equivalent to that of the ordinary Asiatic

elephant; and, in spite of its great bulk, is a fleet and active

animal, as indeed is generally the case with those oxen which inhabit

elevated localities. Still, though it can run with considerable speed,

it is not able to keep up the pace for any great distance, and at the

end of a mile or two can be brought to bay.

Like most animals, however large and powerful they may be, it fears

the presence of man, and, if it sees or scents a human being, will try

to slip quietly away; but when it is baffled in this attempt, and

forced to fight, it becomes a fierce and dangerous antagonist,

charging with wonderful quickness, and using its short and powerful

horns with great effect. A wounded Bison, when fairly brought to bay,

is perhaps as awkward an opponent as can be found, and to kill it

without the aid of firearms is no easy matter.

Although the countries in which it lives are infested with wolves, it

seems to have no fear of them when in health; and, even when pressed

by their winter's hunger, the wolves do not venture to attack even a

single Bison, much less a herd of them. Like other wild cattle, it

likes to dabble in muddy pools, and is fond of harbouring in thickets

near such localities; and those who have to travel through the forest

keep clear of such spots, unless they desire to drive out the animal

for the purpose of killing it.

Like the extinct Aurochs, the Bison has never been domesticated, and,

although the calves have been captured while very young, and attempts

have been made to train them to harness, their innate wildness of

disposition has always baffled such efforts.

THE GAZELLE, OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE.

The Gazelle identified with the _Tsebi_, i.e. the Roe or Roebuck

of Scripture--Various passages relating to the Tsebi--Its

swiftness, its capabilities as a beast of chase, its beauty, and

the quality of its flesh--The Tsebiyah rendered in Greek as

Tabitha, and translated as Dorcas, or Gazelle--Different

varieties of the Gazelle--How the Gazelle defends itself against

wild beasts--Chase of the Gazelle--The net, the battue, and the

pitfall--Coursing the Gazelle with greyhounds and falcons--Mr.

Chasseaud's account of a hunting party--Gentleness of the

Gazelle.

We now leave the Ox tribe, and come to the Antelopes, several species

of which are mentioned in the Scriptures. Four kinds of antelope are

found in or near the Holy Land, and there is little doubt that all of

them are mentioned in the sacred volume.

The first that will be described is the well-known GAZELLE, which is

acknowledged to be the animal that is represented by the word _Tsebi_,

or _Tsebiyah_. The Jewish Bible accepts the same rendering. This word

occurs many times, sometimes as a metaphor, and sometimes representing

some animal which was lawful food, and which therefore belonged to the

true ruminants. Moreover, its flesh was not only legally capable of

being eaten, but was held in such estimation that it was provided for

the table of Solomon himself, together with other animals which will

be described in their turn.

We will first take the passages where the word is used metaphorically,

or as a poetical image. That it was exceedingly swift of foot is

evident from several instances in which the animal is mentioned. For

example, in 2 Sam. ii. 18, we are told that Asahel, the brother of

Joab, was "as light of foot as a wild roe," or, as the passage may

also be translated, "one of the roes that is in the field." And in 1

Chron. xii. 8, we find the following description of eleven warriors

who attached themselves to David:--"Of the Gadites there separated

themselves unto David into the hold to the wilderness men of might,

and men of war fit for the battle, that could handle shield and

buckler, whose faces were like the faces of lions, and were as swift

as the roes upon the mountains."

That it was a beast of chase is as plainly to be gathered from the

sacred writings. See, for example, Prov. vi. 4, 5: "Give not sleep to

thine eyes, nor slumber to thine eyelids. Deliver thyself as a roe

from the hand of the hunter, and as a bird from the hand of the

fowler."

The same imagery is employed by the prophet Isaiah, xiii. 13, 14:--

"Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of

her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of His

fierce anger. And it shall be as the chased roe, and as a sheep that

no man taketh up: they shall every man turn to his own people, and

flee every one into his own land."

Having now learned that the Tsebi was very fleet of foot and a beast

of chase, we come to another series of passages, which show that it

was an animal of acknowledged beauty. In that most remarkable poem,

the Song of Solomon, or the "Song of Songs," as it is more rightly

named, there are repeated allusions to the Tsebi. In some cases the

name of the Roe is used as a sort of adjuration--"I charge thee by the

roes;" and in others the lover, whether man or woman, is compared to

the Roe. There is one consecutive series of passages in which the word

is repeatedly used. See Cant. ii. 7-9: "I charge you, O ye daughters

of Jerusalem, by the roes, and by the hinds of the field, that ye stir

not up, nor awake my love, till he please. The voice of my beloved!

behold, he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills.

My beloved is like a roe or a young hart." And in the last verse of

the poem the same image is repeated--"Make haste, my beloved, and be

thou like to a roe or to a young hart upon the mountains of spices."

Allusion is made to the beauty of the Roe, or Gazelle, in a well-known

name, Tabitha, which is, in fact, a slight corruption of the Hebrew

Tsebiyah, and is translated into Greek as Dorcas, or Gazelle. "Now

there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by

interpretation is called Dorcas (_i.e._ the Gazelle). This woman was

full of good works and alms deeds which she did."

As to the flesh of the Gazelle, or Roe, it is mentioned in Deut. xii.

15, xiv. 5, as one of the animals that affords lawful food; and the

same permission is reiterated in xv. 22, with the proviso that the

blood shall be poured out on the earth like water.

Having now glanced at the various passages of Scripture wherein the

Gazelle is mentioned, we will proceed to the animal itself, its

appearance, locality, and general habits, in order to see how they

agree with the Scriptural allusions to the Tsebi.

As to its flesh, it is even now considered a great dainty, although it

is not at all agreeable to European taste, being hard, dry, and

without flavour. Still, as has been well remarked, tastes differ as

well as localities, and an article of food which is a costly luxury in

one land is utterly disdained in another, and will hardly be eaten

except by one who is absolutely dying of starvation.

The Gazelle is very common in Palestine in the present day, and, in

the ancient times, must have been even more plentiful. There are

several varieties of it, which were once thought to be distinct

species, but are now acknowledged to be mere varieties, all of which

are referable to the single species _Gazella Dorcas_. There is, for

example, the Corinna, or Corine Antelope, which is a rather

boldly-spotted female; the Kevella Antelope, in which the horns are

slightly flattened; the small variety called the Ariel, or Cora; the

grey Kevel, which is a rather large variety; and the Long-horned

Gazelle, which owes its name to a rather large development of the

horns.

[Illustration: THE GAZELLE, (_Gazella Dorcus_) OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE

"_Behold, he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the

hills. My beloved is like a roe or a young hart._"--CANT. ii. 8, 9.]

Whatever variety may inhabit any given spot, they all have the same

habits. They are gregarious animals, associating together in herds

often of considerable size, and deriving from their numbers an element

of strength which would otherwise be wanting. Against mankind, numbers

are of no avail; but when the agile though feeble Gazelle has to

defend itself against the predatory animals of its own land, it can

only defend itself by the concerted action of the whole herd. Should,

for example, the wolves prowl round a herd of Gazelles, after their

treacherous wont, the Gazelles instantly assume a posture of

self-defence. They form themselves into a compact phalanx, all the

males coming to the front, and the strongest and boldest taking on

themselves the honourable duty of facing the foe. The does and the

young are kept within their ranks, and so formidable is the array of

sharp, menacing horns, that beasts as voracious as the wolf, and far

more powerful, have been known to retire without attempting to charge.

As a rule, however, the Gazelle does not desire to resist, and prefers

its legs to its horns as a mode of insuring safety. So fleet is the

animal, that it seems to fly over the ground as if propelled by

volition alone, and its light, agile frame is so enduring, that a fair

chase has hardly any prospect of success. Hunters, therefore, prefer a

trap of some kind, if they chase the animal merely for food or for the

sake of its skin, and contrive to kill considerable numbers at once.

Sometimes they dig pitfalls, and drive the Gazelles into them by

beating a large tract of country, and gradually narrowing the circle.

Sometimes they use nets, such as have already been described, and

sometimes they line the sides of a ravine with archers and spearmen,

and drive the herd of Gazelles through the treacherous defile.

These modes of slaughter are, however, condemned by the true hunter,

who looks upon those who use them much in the same light as an English

sportsman looks on a man who shoots foxes. The greyhound and the

falcon are both employed in the legitimate capture of the Gazelle, and

in some cases both are trained to work together. Hunting the Gazelle

with the greyhound very much resembles coursing in our own country,

and chasing it with the hawk is exactly like the system of falconry

that was once so popular an English sport, and which even now shows

signs of revival.

It is, however, when the dog and the bird are trained to work together

that the spectacle becomes really novel and interesting to an English

spectator.

As soon as the Gazelles are fairly in view, the hunter unhoods his

hawk, and holds it up so that it may see the animals. The bird fixes

its eye on one Gazelle, and by that glance the animal's doom is

settled. The falcon darts after the Gazelles, followed by the dog, who

keeps his eye on the hawk, and holds himself in readiness to attack

the animal that his feathered ally may select. Suddenly the falcon,

which has been for some few seconds hovering over the herd of

Gazelles, makes a stoop upon the selected victim, fastening its talons

in its forehead, and, as it tries to shake off its strange foe, flaps

its wings into the Gazelle's eyes so as to blind it. Consequently, the

rapid course of the antelope is arrested, so that the dog is able to

come up and secure the animal while it is struggling to escape from

its feathered enemy. Sometimes, though rarely, a young and

inexperienced hawk swoops down with such reckless force that it misses

the forehead of the Gazelle, and impales itself upon the sharp horns,

just as in England the falcon is apt to be spitted on the bill of the

heron.

The most sportsmanlike mode of hunting the Gazelle is to use the

falcon alone; but for this sport a bird must possess exceptional

strength, swiftness, and intelligence. A very spirited account of such

a chase is given by Mr. G. W. Chasseaud, in his "Druses of the

Lebanon:"--

"Whilst reposing here, our old friend with the falcon informs us that

at a short distance from this spot is a khan called Nebbi Youni, from

a supposition that the prophet Jonah was here landed by the whale; but

the old man is very indignant when we identify the place with a fable,

and declare to him that similar sights are to be seen at Gaza and

Scanderoon. But his good humour is speedily recovered by reverting to

the subject of the exploits and cleverness of his falcon. This reminds

him that we have not much time to waste in idle talk, as the greater

heats will drive the gazelles from the plains to the mountain

retreats, and lose us the opportunity of enjoying the most

sportsmanlike amusement in Syria. Accordingly, bestriding our animals

again, we ford the river at that point where a bridge once stood.

"We have barely proceeded twenty minutes before the keen eye of the

falconer has descried a herd of gazelles quietly grazing in the

distance. Immediately he reins in his horse, and enjoining silence,

instead of riding at them, as we might have felt inclined to do, he

skirts along the banks of the river, so as to cut off, if possible,

the retreat of these fleet animals where the banks are narrowest,

though very deep, but which would be cleared at a single leap by the

gazelles. Having successfully accomplished this manoeuvre, he again

removes the hood from the hawk, and indicates to us that precaution

is no longer necessary. Accordingly, first adding a few slugs to the

charges in our barrels, we balance our guns in an easy posture, and,

giving the horses their reins, set off at full gallop, and with a loud

hurrah, right towards the already startled gazelles.

"The timid animals, at first paralysed by our appearance, stand and

gaze for a second terror-stricken at our approach; but their pause is

only momentary; they perceive in an instant that the retreat to their

favourite haunts has been secured, and so they dash wildly forward

with all the fleetness of despair, coursing over the plain with no

fixed refuge in view, and nothing but their fleetness to aid in their

delivery. A stern chase is a long chase, and so, doubtless, on the

present occasion it would prove with ourselves, for there is many and

many a mile of level country before us, and our horses, though swift

of foot, stand no chance in this respect with the gazelles.

"Now, however, the old man has watched for a good opportunity to

display the prowess and skill of his falcon: he has followed us only

at a hand-gallop; but the hawk, long inured to such pastime, stretches

forth its neck eagerly in the direction of the flying prey, and being

loosened from its pinions, sweeps up into the air like a shot, and

passes overhead with incredible velocity. Five minutes more, and the

bird has outstripped even the speed of the light-footed gazelle; we

see him through the dust and haze that our own speed throws around us,

hovering but an instant over the terrified herd; he has singled out

his prey, and, diving with unerring aim, fixes his iron talons into

the head of the terrified animal.

"This is the signal for the others to break up their orderly retreat,

and to speed over the plain in every direction. Some, despite the

danger that hovers on their track, make straight for their old and

familiar haunts, and passing within twenty yards of where we ride,

afford us an opportunity of displaying our skill as amateur huntsmen

on horseback; nor does it require but little nerve and dexterity to

fix our aim whilst our horses are tearing over the ground. However,

the moment presents itself, the loud report of barrel after barrel

startles the unaccustomed inmates of that unfrequented waste; one

gazelle leaps twice its own height into the air, and then rolls over,

shot through the heart; another bounds on yet a dozen paces, but,

wounded mortally, staggering, halts, and then falls to the ground.

"This is no time for us to pull in and see what is the amount of

damage done, for the falcon, heedless of all surrounding incidents,

clings firmly to the head of its terrified victim, flapping its strong

wings awhile before the poor brute's terrified eyes, half blinding it

and rendering its head dizzy; till, after tearing round and round with

incredible speed, the poor creature stops, panting for breath, and,

overcome with excessive terror, drops down fainting upon the earth.

Now the air resounds with the acclamations and hootings of the

ruthless victors.

"The old man is wild in his transports of delight. More certain of the

prowess of his bird than ourselves, he has stopped awhile to gather

together the fruits of our booty, and, with these suspended to his

saddle bow, he canters up leisurely, shouting lustily the while the

praises of his infallible hawk; then getting down, and hoodwinking the

bird again, he first of all takes the precaution of fastening together

the legs of the fallen gazelle, and then he humanely blows up into its

nostrils. Gradually the natural brilliancy returns to the dimmed eyes

of the gazelle, then it struggles valiantly, but vainly, to

disentangle itself from its fetters.

"Pitying its efforts, the falconer throws a handkerchief over its

head, and, securing this prize, claims it as his own, declaring that

he will bear it home to his house in the mountains, where, after a few

weeks' kind treatment and care, it will become as domesticated and

affectionate as a spaniel. Meanwhile, Abou Shein gathers together the

fallen booty, and, tying them securely with cords, fastens them behind

his own saddle, declaring, with a triumphant laugh, that we shall

return that evening to the city of Beyrout with such game as few

sportsmen can boast of having carried thither in one day."

The gentle nature of the Gazelle is as proverbial as its grace and

swiftness, and is well expressed in the large, soft, liquid eye, which

has formed from time immemorial the stock comparison of Oriental poets

when describing the eyes of beauty.

THE PYGARG, OR ADDAX.

The Dishon or Dyshon--Signification of the word

Pygarg--Certainty that the Dishon is an antelope, and that it

must be one of a few species--Former and present range of the

Addax--Description of the Addax--The Strepsiceros of Pliny.

There is a species of animal mentioned once in the Scriptures under

the name of Dishon which the Jewish Bible leaves untranslated, and

merely gives as Dyshon, and which is rendered in the Septuagint by

Pugargos, or PYGARG, as one version gives it. Now, the meaning of the

word Pygarg is white-crouped, and for that reason the Pygarg of the

Scriptures is usually held to be one of the white-crouped antelopes,

of which several species are known. Perhaps it may be one of them--it

may possibly be neither, and it may probably refer to all of them.

But that an antelope of some kind is meant by the word Dishon is

evident enough, and it is also evident that the Dishon must have been

one of the antelopes which could be obtained by the Jews. Now as the

species of antelope which could have furnished food for that nation

are very few in number, it is clear that, even if we do not hit upon

the exact species, we may be sure of selecting an animal that was

closely allied to it. Moreover, as the nomenclature is exceedingly

loose, it is probable that more than one species might have been

included in the word Dishon.

Modern commentators have agreed that there is every probability that

the Dishon of the Pentateuch was the antelope known by the name of

Addax.

This handsome antelope is a native of Northern Africa. It has a very

wide range, and, even at the present day, is found in the vicinity of

Palestine, so that it evidently was one of the antelopes which could

be killed by Jewish hunters. From its large size, and long twisted

horns, it bears a strong resemblance to the Koodoo of Southern Africa.

The horns, however, are not so long, nor so boldly twisted, the curve

being comparatively slight, and not possessing the bold spiral shape

which distinguishes those of the koodoo.

[Illustration: THE ADDAX, OR PYGARG OF SCRIPTURE.

"_These are the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, ... the

pygarg, and the wild ox, and the chamois._"--DEUT. xiv. 4, 5.]

The ordinary height of the Addax is three feet seven or eight inches,

and the horns are almost exactly alike in the two sexes. Their length,

from the head to the tips, is rather more than two feet. Its colour is

mostly white, but a thick mane of dark black hair falls from the

throat, a patch of similar hair grows on the forehead, and the back

and shoulders are greyish brown. There is no mane on the back of the

neck, as is the case with the koodoo.

The Addax is a sand-loving animal, as is shown by the wide and

spreading hoofs, which afford it a firm footing on the yielding soil.

In all probability, this is one of the animals which would be taken,

like the wild bull, in a net, being surrounded and driven into the

toils by a number of hunters. It is not, however, one of the

gregarious species, and is not found in those vast herds in which some

of the antelopes love to assemble.

Some writers reject the Addax as the Dishon, and are inclined to

consider that the real representative of the word is to be found in

the Ariel or Isabella gazelles. Of these, however, we have already

treated, and enough has been said about them to show that these

gazelles are in all probability comprised under the name Tsebi.

It has been suggested, in contradiction to the opinion that the Dishon

is the Addax, that the word Strepsiceros, or Twisted Horn, is given to

it by Pliny, who also mentions that one of the native names for the

animal is Adas, or Akas, and that he distinguishes it from the Pygarg.

Still, the weight of evidence is so great in favour of the identity of

the Dishon and the Pygarg, that we may accept the interpretation with

safety.

THE FALLOW-DEER, OR BUBALE.

The word Jachmur evidently represents a species of

antelope--Probability that the Jachmur is identical with the

Bubale, or Bekk'r-el-Wash--Resemblance of the animal to the ox

tribe--Its ox-like horns and mode of attack--Its capability of

domestication--Former and present range of the Bubale--Its

representation on the monuments of ancient Egypt--Delicacy of

its flesh--Size and general appearance of the animal.

It has already been mentioned that in the Old Testament there occur

the names of three or four animals, which clearly belong to one or

other of three or four antelopes. Only one of these names now remains

to be identified. This is the Jachmur, or Yachmur, a word which has

been rendered in the Septuagint as Boubalos, and has been translated

in our Authorized Version as FALLOW DEER.

We shall presently see that the Fallow Deer is to be identified with

another animal, and that the word Jachmur must find another

interpretation. If we follow the Septuagint, and call it the BUBALE,

we shall identify it with a well-known antelope, called by the Arabs

the "Bekk'r-el-Wash," and known to zoologists as the BUBALE

(_Acronotus bubalis_).

This fine antelope would scarcely be recognised as such by an

unskilled observer, as in its general appearance it much more

resembles the ox tribe than the antelope. Indeed, the Arabic title,

"Bekk'r-el-Wash," or Wild Cow, shows how close must be the resemblance

to the oxen. The Arabs, and indeed all the Orientals in whose

countries it lives, believe it not to be an antelope, but one of the

oxen, and class it accordingly.

How much the appearance of the Bubale justifies them in this opinion

may be judged by reference to the figure on page 145. The horns are

thick, short, and heavy, and are first inclined forwards, and then

rather suddenly bent backwards. This formation of the horns causes the

Bubale to use his weapons after the manner of the bull, thereby

increasing the resemblance between them. When it attacks, the Bubale

lowers its head to the ground, and as soon as its antagonist is within

reach, tosses its head violently upwards, or swings it with a sidelong

upward blow. In either case, the sharp curved horns, impelled by the

powerful neck of the animal, and assisted by the weight of the large

head, become most formidable weapons.

It is said that in some places, where the Bubales have learned to

endure the presence of man, they will mix with his herds for the sake

of feeding with them, and by degrees become so accustomed to the

companionship of their domesticated friends, that they live with the

herd as if they had belonged to it all their lives. This fact shows

that the animal possesses a gentle disposition, and it is said to be

as easily tamed as the gazelle itself.

Even at the present day the Bubale has a very wide range, and formerly

had in all probability a much wider. It is indigenous to Barbary, and

has continued to spread itself over the greater part of Northern

Africa, including the borders of the Sahara, the edges of the

cultivated districts, and up the Nile for no small distance. In former

days it was evidently a tolerably common animal of chase in Upper

Egypt, as there are representations of it on the monuments, drawn

with the quaint truthfulness which distinguishes the monumental

sculpture of that period.

[Illustration: THE BUBALE, OR FALLOW DEER OF SCRIPTURE.

"_And Solomon's provision for one day was thirty measures of fine

flour, and threescore measure of meal; ten fat oxen, and twenty oxen

out of the pastures, and an hundred sheep; beside harts and roebucks,

and fallow-deer, and fatted fowl._"--1 KINGS iv. 22, 23.]

It is probable that in and about Palestine it was equally common, so

that there is good reason why it should be specially named as one of

the animals that were lawful food. Not only was its flesh permitted to

be eaten, but it was evidently considered as a great dainty, inasmuch

as the Jachmur is mentioned in 1 Kings iv. 23 as one of the animals

which were brought to the royal table. See the passage quoted in full

below the illustration.

Even at the present day it is seen near the Red Sea; and as within the

memory of man it had a much larger range than can now be assigned to

it, we may safely conjecture that it resided in Palestine in

sufficient numbers to afford a constant supply of food to the royal

residence.

In size the Bubale is about equal to that of a heifer, and its general

colour is reddish brown. The head is long and narrow, so that the

heavy and deeply-ridged horns seem to stand out with peculiar

boldness. The shoulders are rather high, the neck is very ox-like, and

from the end of the tail hangs a tuft of long black hair. It is a

gregarious animal, and is found in herds, though not of very great

numbers.

The Bubale is closely allied to the hartebeest, the well-known

antelope of Southern Africa.

THE SHEEP.

Importance of Sheep in the Bible--The Sheep the chief wealth of

the pastoral tribes--Tenure of land--Value of good

pasture-land--Arab shepherds of the present day--Difference

between the shepherds of Palestine and England--Wanderings of

the flocks in search of food--Value of the wells--How the Sheep

are watered--Duties of the shepherd--The shepherd a kind of

irregular soldier--His use of the sling--Sheep following their

shepherd--Calling the Sheep by name--The shepherd usually a part

owner of the flocks--Structure of the sheepfolds--The rock

caverns of Palestine--David's adventure with Saul--Penning of

the Sheep by night--Use of the dogs--Sheep sometimes brought up

by hand--How Sheep are fattened in the Lebanon district--The two

breeds of Sheep in Palestine--The broad-tailed Sheep, and its

peculiarities--Reference to this peculiarity in the Bible--The

Talmudical writers, and their directions to sheep-owners.

We now come to a subject which will necessarily occupy us for some

little time.

There is, perhaps, no animal which occupies a larger space in the

Scriptures than the SHEEP. Whether in religious, civil, or domestic

life, we find that the Sheep is bound up with the Jewish nation in a

way that would seem almost incomprehensible, did we not recall the

light which the New Testament throws upon the Old, and the many

allusions to the coming Messiah under the figure of the Lamb that

taketh away the sins of the world.

In treating of the Sheep, it will be perhaps advisable to begin the

account by taking the animal simply as one of those creatures which

have been domesticated from time immemorial, dwelling slightly on

those points on which the sheep-owners of the old days differed from

those of our own time.

In the first place, the tenure of land was--and is still--entirely

different from anything that can be found in our own country. With us,

the comparatively large amount of population, placed on a

comparatively small area of ground, prohibits the mode of

sheep-keeping as practised in the East, where the pasture-lands are of

vast extent, and common to all who choose to take their flocks to

them. We have at present the Downs and the Highlands as examples of

such pasturage, but they are of small extent when compared with the

vast plains which are used for this purpose in the East.

The only claim to the land seems, in the old times of the Scriptures,

to have lain in cultivation, or perhaps in the land immediately

surrounding a well. But any one appears to have taken a piece of

ground and cultivated it, or to have dug a well wherever he chose, and

thereby to have acquired a sort of right to the soil. The same custom

prevails at the present day among the cattle-breeding races of

Southern Africa. The banks of rivers, on account of their superior

fertility, were considered as the property of the chiefs who lived

along their course, but the inland soil was free to all.

Had it not been for this freedom of the land, it would have been

impossible for the great men to have nourished the enormous flocks and

herds of which their wealth consisted; but, on account of the lack of

ownership of the soil, a flock could be moved to one district after

another as fast as it exhausted the herbage, the shepherds thus

unconsciously imitating the habits of the gregarious animals, which

are always on the move from one spot to another.

Pasturage being thus free to all, Sheep had a higher comparative value

than is the case with ourselves, who have to pay in some way for their

keep. There is a proverb in the Talmud which may be curtly translated,

"Land sell, sheep buy."

The value of a good pasture-ground for the flocks is so great, that

its possession is well worth a battle, the shepherds being saved from

a most weary and harassing life, and being moreover fewer in number

than is needed when the pasturage is scanty. Sir S. Baker, in his work

on Abyssinia, makes some very interesting remarks upon the Arab

herdsmen, who are placed in conditions very similar to those of the

Israelitish shepherds in a bad pasture-land.

"The Arabs are creatures of necessity; their nomadic life is

compulsory, as the existence of their flocks and herds depends upon

the pasturage. Thus, with the change of seasons they must change their

localities according to the presence of fodder for their cattle....

The Arab cannot halt in one spot longer than the pasturage will

support his flocks. The object of his life being fodder, he must

wander in search of the ever-changing supply. His wants must be few,

as the constant change of encampment necessitates the transport of all

his household goods; thus he reduces to a minimum his domestic

furniture and utensils....

"This striking similarity to the descriptions of the Old Testament is

exceedingly interesting to a traveller when residing among these

curious and original people. With the Bible in one's hand, and these

unchanged tribes before the eyes, there is a thrilling illustration of

the sacred record; the past becomes the present, the veil of three

thousand years is raised, and the living picture is a witness to the

exactness of the historical description. At the same time there is a

light thrown upon many obscure passages in the Old Testament by the

experience of the present customs and figures of speech of the Arabs,

which are precisely those that were practised at the periods

described....

"Should the present history of the country be written by an Arab

scribe, the style of the description would be precisely that of the

Old Testament. There is a fascination in the unchangeable features of

the Nile regions. There are the vast pyramids that have defied time,

the river upon which Moses was cradled in infancy, the same sandy

desert through which he led his people, and the watering-places where

their flocks were led to drink. The wild and wandering Arabs, who

thousands of years ago dug out the wells in the wilderness, are

represented by their descendants, unchanged, who now draw water from

the deep wells of their forefathers, with the skins that have never

altered their fashion.

"The Arabs, gathering with their goats and sheep around the wells

to-day, recall the recollection of that distant time when 'Jacob went

on his journey, and came into the land of the people of the east. And

he looked, and behold a well in the field, and lo! there were three

flocks of sheep lying by it,' &c. The picture of that scene would be

an illustration of Arab daily life in the Nubian deserts, where the

present is a mirror of the past."

Owing to the great number of Sheep which they have to tend, and the

peculiar state of the country, the life of the shepherd in Palestine

is even now very different from that of an English shepherd, and in

the days of the early Scriptures the distinction was even more

distinctly marked.

Sheep had to be tended much more carefully than we generally think. In

the first place, a thoughtful shepherd had always one idea before his

mind,--namely, the possibility of obtaining sufficient water for his

flocks. Even pasturage is less important than water, and, however

tempting a district might be, no shepherd would venture to take his

charge there if he were not sure of obtaining water. In a climate such

as ours, this ever-pressing anxiety respecting water can scarcely be

appreciated, for in hot climates not only is water scarce, but it is

needed far more than in a temperate and moist climate. Thirst does its

work with terrible quickness, and there are instances recorded where

men have sat down and died of thirst in sight of the river which they

had not strength to reach.

In places therefore through which no stream runs, the wells are the

great centres of pasturage, around which are to be seen vast flocks

extending far in every direction. These wells are kept carefully

closed by their owners, and are only opened for the use of those who

are entitled to water their flocks at them.

Noontide is the general time for watering the Sheep, and towards that

hour all the flocks may be seen converging towards their respective

wells, the shepherd at the head of each flock, and the Sheep following

him. See how forcible becomes the imagery of David, the shepherd poet,

"The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down

in green pastures (or, in pastures of tender grass): He leadeth me

beside the still waters" Ps. xxiii. 1, 2). Here we have two of the

principal duties of the good shepherd brought prominently before

us,--namely, the guiding of the Sheep to green pastures and leading

them to fresh water. Very many references are made in the Scriptures

to the pasturage of sheep, both in a technical and a metaphorical

sense; but as our space is limited, and these passages are very

numerous, only one or two of each will be taken.

In the story of Joseph, we find that when his father and brothers were

suffering from the famine, they seem to have cared as much for their

Sheep and cattle as for themselves, inasmuch as among a pastoral

people the flocks and herds constitute the only wealth. So, when

Joseph at last discovered himself, and his family were admitted to the

favour of Pharaoh, the first request which they made was for their

flocks. "Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And

they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also

our fathers.

"They said moreover unto Pharaoh, For to sojourn in the land are we

come; for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks; for the

famine is sore in the land of Canaan: now therefore, we pray thee, let

thy servants dwell in the land of Goshen."

This one incident, so slightly remarked in the sacred history, gives a

wonderfully clear notion of the sort of life led by Jacob and his

sons. Forming, according to custom, a small tribe of their own, of

which the father was the chief, they led a pastoral life, taking their

continually increasing herds and flocks from place to place as they

could find food for them. For example, at the memorable time when the

story of Joseph begins, he was sent by his father to his brothers, who

were feeding the flocks, and he wandered about for some time, not

knowing where to find them. It may seem strange that he should be

unable to discover such very conspicuous objects as large flocks of

sheep and goats, but the fact is that they had been driven from one

pasture-land to another, and had travelled in search of food all the

way from Shechem to Dothan.

In 1 Chron. iv. 39, 40, we read of the still pastoral Israelites that

"they went to the entrance of Gedor, even unto the east side of the

valley, to seek pasture for their flocks. And they found fat pasture

and good, and the land was wide, and quiet, and peaceable."

How it came to be quiet and peaceable is told in the context. It was

peaceable simply because the Israelites were attracted by the good

pasturage, attacked the original inhabitants, and exterminated them so

effectually that none were left to offer resistance to the usurpers.

And we find from this passage that the value of good pasture-land

where the Sheep could feed continually without being forced to wander

from one spot to another was so considerable, that the owners of the

flocks engaged in war, and exposed their own lives, in order to obtain

so valuable a possession.

As to the figurative passages, they are far too numerous to be quoted,

and are found throughout the whole of the Old and New Testaments. For

example, see Psalm lxxix. 13, "So we Thy people and the sheep of Thy

pasture will give Thee thanks for ever." And again, "I will feed them

upon the mountains of Israel by the rivers, and in all the inhabited

places of the country. I will feed them in a good pasture, and upon

the high mountains of Israel shall their fold be: there shall they lie

in a good fold, and in a fat pasture shall they feed upon the

mountains of Israel" (Ezek. xxxiv. 13, 14).

We will now look at one or two of the passages that mention watering

the Sheep--a duty so imperative on an Oriental shepherd, and so

needless to our own.

In the first place we find that most graphic narrative which occurs in

Gen xxix. to which a passing reference has already been made. When

Jacob was on his way from his parents to the home of Laban in

Padan-aram, he came upon the very well which belonged to his uncle,

and there saw three flocks of Sheep lying around the well, waiting

until the proper hour arrived. According to custom, a large stone was

laid over the well, so as to perform the double office of keeping out

the sand and dust, and of guarding the precious water against those

who had no right to it. And when he saw his cousin Rachel arrive with

the flock of which she had the management, he, according to the

courtesy of the country and the time, rolled away the ponderous

barrier, and poured out water into the troughs for the Sheep which

Rachel tended.

About two hundred years afterwards, we find Moses performing a similar

act. When he was obliged to escape into Midian on account of his fatal

quarrel with a tyrannical Egyptian, he sat down by a well, waiting for

the time when the stone might be rolled away, and the water be

distributed. Now it happened that this well belonged to Jethro, the

chief priest of the country, whose wealth consisted principally of

Sheep. He entrusted his flock to the care of his seven daughters, who

led their Sheep to the well and drew water as usual into the troughs.

Presuming on their weakness, other shepherds came and tried to drive

them away, but were opposed by Moses, who drove them away, and with

his own hands watered the flock.

Now in both these examples we find that the men who performed the

courteous office of drawing the water and pouring it into the

sheep-troughs married afterwards the girl to whose charge the flocks

had been committed. This brings us to the Oriental custom which has

been preserved to the present day.

The wells at which the cattle are watered at noon-day are the

meeting-places of the tribe, and it is chiefly at the well that the

young men and women meet each other. As each successive flock arrives

at the well, the number of the people increases, and while the sheep

and goats lie patiently round the water, waiting for the time when the

last flock shall arrive, and the stone be rolled off the mouth of the

well, the gossip of the tribe is discussed, and the young people have

ample opportunity for the pleasing business of courtship.

As to the passages in which the wells, rivers, brooks, water-springs,

are spoken of in a metaphorical sense, they are too numerous to be

quoted.

And here I may observe, that in reality the whole of Scripture has its

symbolical as well as its outward signification; and that, until we

have learned to read the Bible strictly according to the spirit, we

cannot understand one-thousandth part of the mysteries which it

conceals behind its veil of language; nor can we appreciate

one-thousandth part of the treasures of wisdom which lie hidden in its

pages from those who have eyes and cannot see, ears and cannot hear.

Another duty of the shepherd of ancient Palestine was to guard his

flock from depredators, whether man or beast. Therefore the shepherd

was forced to carry arms; to act as a sentry during the night; and, in

fact, to be a sort of irregular soldier. A fully-armed shepherd had

with him his bow, his spear, and his sword, and not even a shepherd

lad was without his sling and the great quarter-staff which is even

now universally carried by the tribes along the Nile--a staff as thick

as a man's wrist, and six or seven feet in length. He was skilled in

the use of all these weapons, especially in that of the sling.

In England, in these days, the sling is only considered as a mere toy,

whereas, before the introduction of fire-arms, it was one of the most

formidable weapons that could be wielded by light troops. Round and

smooth stones weighing three or four ounces were the usual

projectiles, and, by dint of constant practice from childhood, the

slingers could aim with a marvellous precision. Of this fact we have a

notable instance in David, who knew that the sling and the five stones

in the hand of an active youth unencumbered by armour, and wearing

merely the shepherd's simple tunic, were more than a match for all the

ponderous weapons of the gigantic Philistine.

It has sometimes been the fashion to attribute the successful aim of

David to a special miracle, whereas those who are acquainted with

ancient weapons know well that no miracle was wrought, because none

was needed; a good slinger at that time being as sure of his aim as a

good rifleman of our days.

The sling was in constant requisition, being used both in directing

the Sheep and in repelling enemies: a stone skilfully thrown in front

of a straying Sheep being a well-understood signal that the animal had

better retrace its steps if it did not want to feel the next stone on

its back.

Passing his whole life with his flock, the shepherd was identified

with his Sheep far more than is the case in this country. He knew all

his Sheep by sight, he called them all by their names, and they all

knew him and recognised his voice. He did not drive them, but he led

them, walking in their front, and they following him. Sometimes he

would play with them, pretending to run away while they pursued him,

exactly as an infant-school teacher plays with the children.

Consequently, they looked upon him as their protector as well as their

feeder, and were sure to follow wherever he led them.

We must all remember how David, who had passed all his early years as

a shepherd, speaks of God as the Shepherd of Israel, and the people as

Sheep; never mentioning the Sheep as being driven, but always as being

led. "Thou leddest Thy people like a flock, by the hands of Moses and

Aaron" (Ps. lxxvii. 20); "The Lord is my Shepherd.... He leadeth me

beside the still waters" (Ps. xxiii. 1, 2); "Lead me in a plain path,

because of mine enemies" (Ps. xxvii. 11); together with many other

passages too numerous to be quoted.

[Illustration: SHEEP FOLLOWING THEIR SHEPHERD.

"_He calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out._"--JOHN

x. 3.]

Our Lord Himself makes a familiar use of the same image: "He calleth

his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth

his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for

they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will

flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers" (John x.

3-5). And again at verse 26: "Ye believe not, because ye are not of my

sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them,

and they follow me."

Although the shepherds of our own country know their Sheep by sight,

and say that there is as much difference in the faces of Sheep as of

men, they have not, as a rule, attained the art of teaching their

Sheep to recognise their names. This custom, however, is still

retained, as may be seen from a well-known passage in Hartley's

"Researches in Greece and the Levant:"--

"Having had my attention directed last night to the words in John x.

3, I asked my man if it were usual in Greece to give names to the

sheep. He informed me that it was, and that the sheep obeyed the

shepherd when he called them by their names. This morning I had an

opportunity of verifying the truth of this remark. Passing by a flock

of sheep, I asked the shepherd the same question which I had put to

the servant, and he gave me the same answer. I then bade him call one

of his sheep. He did so, and it instantly left its pasturage and its

companions, and ran up to the hands of the shepherd, with signs of

pleasure, and with a prompt obedience which I had never before

observed in any other animal.

"It is also true that in this country, 'a stranger will they not

follow, but will flee from him.' The shepherd told me that many of his

sheep were still wild, that they had not learned their names, but that

by teaching them they would all learn them."

Generally, the shepherd was either the proprietor of the flock, or had

at all events a share in it, of which latter arrangement we find a

well-known example in the bargain which Jacob made with Laban, all the

white Sheep belonging to his father-in-law, and all the dark and

spotted Sheep being his wages as shepherd. Such a man was far more

likely to take care of the Sheep than if he were merely a paid

labourer; especially in a country where the life of a shepherd was a

life of actual danger, and he might at any time be obliged to fight

against armed robbers, or to oppose the wolf, the lion, or the bear.

The combat of the shepherd David with the last-mentioned animals has

already been noticed.

In allusion to the continual risks run by the Oriental shepherd, our

Lord makes use of the following well-known words:--"The thief cometh

not but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they

might have life, and have it more abundantly. I am the Good Shepherd:

the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is an

hireling, ... whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and

leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and

scattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth because he is an hireling,

and careth not for the sheep."

Owing to the continual moving of the Sheep, the shepherd had very hard

work during the lambing time, and was obliged to carry in his arms the

young lambs which were too feeble to accompany their parents, and to

keep close to him those Sheep who were expected soon to become

mothers. At that time of year the shepherd might constantly be seen at

the head of his flock, carrying one or two lambs in his arms,

accompanied by their mothers.

In allusion to this fact Isaiah writes: "His reward is with Him, and

His work before Him. He shall feed His flock like a shepherd; He shall

gather the lambs with His arms and carry them in His bosom, and shall

gently lead them that are with young" (or, "that give suck," according

to the marginal reading). Here we have presented at once before us the

good shepherd who is no hireling, but owns the Sheep; and who

therefore has "his reward with him, and his work before him;" who

bears the tender lambs in his arms, or lays them in the folds of his

mantle, and so carries them in his bosom, and leads by his side their

yet feeble mothers.

Frequent mention is made of the folds in which the Sheep are penned;

and as these folds differed--and still differ--materially from those

of our own land, we shall miss the force of several passages of

Scripture if we do not understand their form, and the materials of

which they were built. Our folds consist merely of hurdles, moveable

at pleasure, and so low that a man can easily jump over them, and so

fragile that he can easily pull them down. Moreover, the Sheep are

frequently enclosed within the fold while they are at pasture.

[Illustration: THE SHEEP.

"He maketh me to lie down in green pastures."--PSALM xxiii. 2.]

If any one should entertain such an idea of the Oriental fold, he

would not see the force of the well-known passage in which our Lord

compares the Church to a sheep fold, and Himself to the door. "He that

entereth not by the door into the sheep fold, but climbeth up some

other way, the same is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in

by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter openeth,

and the sheep hear his voice.... All that ever came before me

are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. I

am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall

go in and out, and find pasture."

Had the fold here mentioned been a simple enclosure of hurdles, such

an image could not have been used. It is evident that the fold to

which allusion was made, and which was probably in sight at the time

when Jesus was disputing with the Pharisees, was a structure of some

pretensions; that it had walls which a thief could only enter by

climbing over them--not by "breaking through" them, as in the case of

a mud-walled private house; and that it had a gate, which was guarded

by a watchman.

In fact, the fold was a solid and enduring building, made of stone.

Thus in Numbers xxxii. it is related that the tribes of Reuben and

Gad, who had great quantities of Sheep and other cattle, asked for the

eastward side of Jordan as a pasture-ground, promising to go and fight

for the people, but previously to build fortified cities for their

families, and folds for their cattle, the folds being evidently, like

the cities, buildings of an enduring nature.

If the reader will refer to the upper left-hand corner of the large

illustration, he will see in the distance the fold into which the

sheep are gathered at nightfall, and will perceive that it is a strong

stone building, with walls of a considerable height. In some places

the folds are simply rock caverns, partly natural and partly

artificial, often enlarged by a stone wall built outside it. It was

the absence of these rock caverns on the east side of Jordan that

compelled the Reubenites and Gadites to build folds for themselves,

whereas on the opposite side places of refuge were comparatively

abundant.

See, for example, the well-known history related in 1 Sam. xxiii.

xxiv. David and his miscellaneous band of warriors, some six hundred

in number, were driven out of the cities by the fear of Saul, and were

obliged to pass their time in the wilderness, living in the "strong

holds" (xxiii. 14, 19), which we find immediately afterwards to be

rock caves (ver. 25). These caves were of large extent, being able to

shelter these six hundred warriors, and, on one memorable occasion, to

conceal them so completely as they stood along the sides, that Saul,

who had just come out of the open air, was not able to discern them

in the dim light, and David even managed to approach him unseen, and

cut off a portion of his outer robe.

That this particular cave was a sheepfold we learn from xxiv. 2-4:

"Then Saul took three thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went

to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats. And he

came to the sheepcotes by the way." Into these strongholds the Sheep

are driven towards nightfall, and, as the flocks converge towards

their resting-place, the bleatings of the sheep are almost deafening.

The shepherds as well as their flocks found shelter in these caves,

making them their resting-places while they were living the strange,

wild, pastoral life among the hills; and at the present day many of

the smaller caves and "holes of the rock" exhibit the vestiges of

human habitation in the shape of straw, hay, and other dried herbage,

which has been used for beds, just as we now find the rude couches of

the coast-guard men in the cliff caves of our shores.

The dogs which are attached to the sheepfolds were, as they are now,

the faithful servants of man, although, as has already been related,

they are not made the companions of man as is the case with ourselves.

Lean, gaunt, hungry, and treated with but scant kindness, they are yet

faithful guardians against the attack of enemies. They do not, as do

our sheepdogs, assist in driving the flocks, because the Sheep are not

driven, but led, but they are invaluable as nocturnal sentries.

Crouching together outside the fold, in little knots of six or seven

together, they detect the approach of wild animals, and at the first

sign of the wolf or the jackal they bark out a defiance, and scare

away the invaders. It is strange that the old superstitious idea of

their uncleanness should have held its ground through so many tens of

centuries; but, down to the present day, the shepherd of Palestine,

though making use of the dog as a guardian of his flock, treats the

animal with utter contempt, not to say cruelty, beating and kicking

the faithful creature on the least provocation, and scarcely giving it

sufficient food to keep it alive.

Sometimes the Sheep are brought up by hand at home. "House-lamb," as

we call it, is even now common, and the practice of house-feeding

peculiar in the old Scriptural times.

We have an allusion to this custom in the well-known parable of the

prophet Nathan: "The poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb,

which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with

him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of

his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter" (2

Sam. xii. 3). A further, though less distinct, allusion is made to

this practice in Isaiah vii. 21: "It shall come to pass in that day,

that a man shall nourish a young cow, and two sheep."

How the Sheep thus brought up by hand were fattened may be conjectured

from the following passage in Mr. D. Urquhart's valuable work on the

Lebanon:--

"In the month of June, they buy from the shepherds, when pasturage has

become scarce and sheep are cheap, two or three sheep; these they feed

by hand. After they have eaten up the old grass and the provender

about the doors, they get vine leaves, and, after the silkworms have

begun to spin, mulberry leaves. They purchase them on trial, and the

test is appetite. If a sheep does not feed well, they return it after

three days. To increase their appetite they wash them twice a day,

morning and evening, a care they never bestow on their own bodies.

"If the sheep's appetite does not come up to their standard, they use

a little gentle violence, folding for them forced leaf-balls and

introducing them into their mouths. The mulberry has the property of

making them fat and tender. At the end of four months the sheep they

had bought at eighty piastres will sell for one hundred and forty, or

will realize one hundred and fifty.

"The sheep is killed, skinned, and hung up. The fat is then removed;

the flesh is cut from the bones, and hung up in the sun. Meanwhile,

the fat has been put in a cauldron on the fire, and as soon as it has

come to boil, the meat is laid on. The proportion of the fat to the

lean is as four to ten, eight 'okes' fat and twenty lean. A little

salt is added, it is simmered for an hour, and then placed in jars for

the use of the family during the year.

"The large joints are separated and used first, as not fit for keeping

long. The fat, with a portion of the lean, chopped fine, is what

serves for cooking the 'bourgoul,' and is called _Dehen_. The sheep

are of the fat-tailed variety, and the tails are the great delicacy."