Transcriber's note:
Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
Text enclosed in equal signs is in bold (=350=).
Small capital text has been replaced with all capitals.
* * * * *
[Illustration: THE ANIMALS ENTER THE ARK.
FRONTISPIECE--"STORY OF THE BIBLE ANIMALS."]
STORY
OF THE
BIBLE ANIMALS
A Description of the
Habits and Uses of every living
Creature mentioned in the Scriptures,
WITH
EXPLANATION OF PASSAGES IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT IN
WHICH REFERENCE IS MADE TO THEM.
BY
J. G. WOOD,
AUTHOR OF "HOMES WITHOUT HANDS,"
"THE ILLUSTRATED NATURAL HISTORY," ETC.
300 ILLUSTRATIONS.
PUBLISHED AT THE OFFICE OF
_CHARLES FOSTER'S PUBLICATIONS_,
No. 118 South Seventh Street,
PHILADELPHIA, PA.
[Illustration: WAR-HORSES AND ANCIENT EGYPTIAN CHARIOT.
See page 307.]
COPYRIGHT, 1888, BY W. A. FOSTER.
PREFACE.
Owing to the different conditions of time, language, country, and
race under which the various books of the Holy Scriptures were
written, it is impossible that they should be rightly understood at
the present day without some study of the customs and manners of
Eastern peoples, as well as of the countries in which they lived.
The Oriental character of the scriptural writings causes them to
abound with metaphors and symbols taken from the common life of the
time.
They contain allusions to the trees, flowers, and herbage, the
creeping things of the earth, the fishes of the sea, the birds of
the air, and the beasts which abode with man or dwelt in the deserts
and forests.
Unless, therefore, we understand these writings as those understood
them for whom they were written, it is evident that we shall
misinterpret instead of rightly comprehending them.
The field which is laid open to us is so large that only one
department of Natural History--namely, Zoology--can be treated in
this work, although it is illustrated by many references to other
branches of Natural History, to the physical geography of Palestine,
Egypt, and Syria, the race-character of the inhabitants, and
historical parallels.
The importance of understanding the nature, habits, and uses of
the animals which are constantly mentioned in the Bible, cannot be
overrated as a means of elucidating the Scriptures, and without this
knowledge we shall not only miss the point of innumerable passages
of the Old and New Testaments, but the words of our Lord Himself
will often be totally misinterpreted, or at least lose part of their
significance.
The object of the present work is therefore, to take in its proper
succession, every creature whose name is given in the Scriptures,
and to supply so much of its history as will enable the reader to
understand all the passages in which it is mentioned.
[Illustration: SHEPHERD LEADING SHEEP AND GOATS TO THEIR FOLD IN THE
ROCK.
See page 191.]
THE AUTHOR.
The Rev. J. G. Wood is a native of London, England. He was educated
at Oxford University, and has long been known, both in England
and America, as not only a learned and accurate writer on Natural
History, but a popular one as well, having the happy faculty of
making the results of scientific study and painstaking observation,
interesting and instructive to all classes of readers.
He has published a number of works on the most familiar departments
of the history of animals, designed to awaken popular interest
in the study. Their titles are "Sketches and Anecdotes of Animal
Life;" "Common Objects of the Seashore and Country;" "My Feathered
Friends;" "Homes Without Hands"--being a description of the
habitations of animals,--and the "Illustrated Natural History," a
book which is widely known both in England and America as a standard
work of great value. It has given the author celebrity, and has
caused him to be considered an eminent authority on the subject
which it treats.
It is evident, from these facts, that it would be difficult to find
a man better qualified than Mr. Wood, to write a book describing the
animals mentioned in the Bible.
Profoundly impressed with the ignorance which prevails towards so
important a feature of the Scriptural Narrative, he has devoted his
ripe powers and special knowledge to the work of dissipating it, and
in this volume, not only fully describes the nature and habits of
all the animals mentioned in the Scriptures, but tells the story of
their relations to mankind.
Mr. Wood is a clergyman of the Church of England, and was for a
time connected with Christ Church, Oxford. He has devoted himself
mainly, however, to authorship in the field which he has chosen,
and in which he has become so well known. In his works he usually
employs a popular style of writing, and does not make scientific
terms prominent. This is especially true of the "Story of the Bible
Animals," which from its easy and interesting character is adapted
to the comprehension of young and old.
[Illutration: animals]
Many of the pictures in this book are taken from the living animals,
or from photographs and sketches by Eastern travellers.
Others represent imaginary scenes, or ancient historical events, and
have been designed by skilful artists after careful study of the
subjects.
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
[A complete Index of Subjects will be found at the end of this
Volume.]
NO. PAGE
1. THE ANIMALS ENTER THE ARK 2
2. WAR-HORSES AND ANCIENT EGYPTIAN CHARIOT 4
3. SHEPHERD LEADING SHEEP AND GOATS TO THEIR FOLD IN THE ROCK 6
4. A DESERT-SCENE 8
5. THE GARDEN OF EDEN 19
6. LION DRINKING AT A POOL 21
7. A LION KILLS THE PROPHET FROM JUDAH 22
8. LION AND TIGER 23
9. THE LION REPLIES TO THE THUNDER 25
10. LIONESS AND YOUNG 27
11. LION CARRYING HOME SUPPLIES 31
12. AFRICAN LIONS 32
13. THE LION ATTACKS THE HERD 34
14. THE LAIR OF THE LION 35
15. THE LION LISTENS TO THE APPROACH OF THE HUNTER 39
16. THE LEOPARD 43
17. LEOPARD ATTACKING A HERD OF DEER 45
18. THE LEOPARD LEAPS UPON HIS PREY 47
19. WAITING 49
20. LEOPARD 51
21. CAT AND KITTENS 52
22. CAT 54
23. DOGS IN AN EASTERN CITY AT NIGHT 57
24. SHIMEI EXULTING OVER KING DAVID 59
25. LAZARUS LYING AT THE RICH MAN'S DOOR 62
26. THE DEATH OF JEZEBEL 63
27. SYRIAN DOG 64
28. EASTERN WATER-SELLER 68
29. WOLVES ATTACKING A FLOCK OF SHEEP 70
30. WOLVES CHASING DEER 72
31. THE WOLF 73
32. WOLVES ATTACKING WILD GOATS 75
33. THE JACKAL 76
34. FOXES OR JACKALS DEVOURING THE CARCASE OF A GOAT 77
35. A FEAST IN PROSPECT 79
36. A FEAST SECURED 81
37. A TRESPASSER 83
38. LEOPARD ROBBED OF ITS PREY BY HYÆNAS 87
39. HYÆNAS DEVOURING BONES 89
40. WEASELS 93
41. THE BITER BIT 95
42. BADGERS 99
43. SUPPOSED FORM AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE TABERNACLE 101
44. BEARS DESCENDING THE MOUNTAINS 105
45. ON THE WATCH 107
46. SEEKING AN OUTLOOK 109
47. A FAMILY PARTY 111
48. BEAR 112
49. PORCUPINE 113
50. THE MOLE-RAT 115
51. THE MOUSE 119
52. DAGON FALLEN DOWN BEFORE THE ARK 120
53. MOUSE AND NEST 121
54. JERBOA OR LEAPING-MOUSE 122
55. THE FIELD-MOUSE 123
56. THE SYRIAN HARE 127
57. A TIMID GROUP 129
58. ALTAR OF BURNT-OFFERING 133
59. THE PRODIGAL SON RETURNS 134
60. ABRAHAM OFFERS FOOD TO THE THREE STRANGERS 135
61. OXEN TREADING OUT GRAIN 139
62. EASTERN OX-CART 140
63. THE ARK OF THE COVENANT BEING DRAWN BY COWS 141
64. PLOUGHING WITH OXEN 143
65. MUMMY OF A SACRED BULL TAKEN FROM AN EGYPTIAN TOMB 146
66. ANIMALS BEING SOLD FOR SACRIFICE IN THE PORCH OF THE TEMPLE 147
67. JEROBOAM SETS UP A GOLDEN CALF AT BETHEL 148
68. THE BUFFALO 149
69. THE BHAINSA, OR DOMESTIC BUFFALO, AND CAMEL DRAWING
THE PLOUGH 151
70. WILD BULL OR ORYX 155
71. THE ORYX 157
72. THE UNICORN 158
73. THE BISON 160
74. BISON KILLING WOLF 161
75. THE GAZELLE OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE 163
76. GAZELLES 164
77. THE FALCON USED IN OUR HUNT 168
78. THE ARAB IS DELIGHTED AT THE SUCCESS OF THE HUNT 169
79. THE GAZELLE 170
80. THE ADDAX 172
81. THE BUBALE OR FALLOW DEER OF SCRIPTURE 175
82. SHEEP 176
83. ARABS JOURNEYING TO FRESH PASTURES 178
84. VIEW OF THE PYRAMIDS 179
85. JACOB MEETS RACHEL AT THE WELL 182
86. EASTERN SHEPHERD WATCHING HIS FLOCK 183
87. DAVID GATHERS STONES FROM THE BROOK TO CAST AT
GOLIATH 185
88. AN EASTERN SHEPHERD 186
89. SHEEP FOLLOWING THEIR SHEPHERD 187
90. ANCIENT SHEEP-PEN 190
91. THE POOR MAN'S LAMB 193
92. THE RICH MAN'S FEAST 193
93. FLOCKS OF SHEEP BEING TAKEN INTO JERUSALEM 195
94. SOUNDING THE TRUMPETS IN THE YEAR OF JUBILEE 202
95. RAM'S HORN TRUMPET 203
96. A LAMB UPON THE ALTAR OF BURNT OFFERING 204
97. THE PLACE OF SACRIFICE 206
98. THE CHAMOIS 211
99. CHAMOIS DEFENDING ITS YOUNG 213
100. CHASING THE AOUDAD 214
101. THE MOUFLON 216
102. JACOB DECEIVES HIS FATHER AND TAKES ESAU'S BLESSING 218
103. THE ANGEL APPEARS TO GIDEON 219
104. EASTERN WATER-CARRIERS WITH BOTTLES MADE OF GOAT-SKIN 224
105. GOATS ON THE MARCH 228
106. HERD OF GOATS ATTACKED BY A LION 231
107. ARABIAN IBEX, THE WILD GOAT OF SCRIPTURE 236
108. THE DEER 238
109. RED DEER 239
110. FALLOW DEER OR HIND OF SCRIPTURE 240
111. A QUIET SPOT 241
112. RED DEER AND FAWN 243
113. THE LEADER OF THE HERD 245
114. THE WATCHFUL DOE 247
115. A KNEELING CAMEL 248
116. JACOB LEAVES LABAN AND RETURNS TO CANAAN 249
117. A CAMP IN THE DESERT 250
118. A GRATEFUL SHADE 253
119. CAMELS LADEN WITH BOUGHS 257
120. MORNING IN THE DESERT: STARTING OF THE CARAVAN 258
121. THE CAMEL POST 261
122. A RUNAWAY 263
123. AN ARAB SHEIK MOUNTED UPON HIS CAMEL 264
124. AARON'S ROD BEARS ALMONDS 266
125. CAMEL RIDING 267
126. THE DELOUL, OR SWIFT CAMEL 268
127. ANOTHER MODE OF RIDING THE CAMEL 270
128. PASSING A CAMEL IN A NARROW STREET OF AN EASTERN CITY 277
129. MOSES AT THE BURNING BUSH 278
130. AN ARAB ENCAMPMENT 279
131. ON THE MARCH 281
132. HAIR OF THE CAMEL 283
133. CAMEL GOING THROUGH A "NEEDLE'S EYE" 285
134. A REST IN THE DESERT 287
135. BACTRIAN CAMELS DRAWING CART 289
136. TRIAL OF ARAB HORSES 292
137. AN ARAB HORSE OF THE KOCHLANI BREED 293
138. THE WAR-HORSE 295
139. ARAB HORSES 297
140. BUYING AN ARAB HORSE 299
141. THE ARAB'S FAVORITE STEEDS 301
142. PHARAOH PURSUES THE ISRAELITES WITH CHARIOTS AND
HORSES, AND THE SEA COVERS THEM 302
143. ELIJAH IS CARRIED UP 304
144. THE ISRAELITES, LED BY JOSHUA, TAKE JERICHO 308
145. ANCIENT BATTLEFIELD 309
146. CHARIOT OF STATE 311
147. ANCIENT EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE REPRESENTING A VICTORIOUS
KING IN HIS CHARIOT SLAYING HIS ENEMIES 313
148. MUMMY OF AN EGYPTIAN KING OVER THREE THOUSAND
YEARS OLD 314
149. ASS AND DRIVER 315
150. ENTERING JERUSALEM 317
151. SYRIAN ASSES 319
152. A STREET IN CAIRO, EGYPT 322
153. BEGGAR IN THE STREETS OF CAIRO 324
154. NIGHT-WATCH IN CAIRO 325
155. HUNTING WILD ASSES 331
156. MULES OF THE EAST 334
157. ABSALOM IS CAUGHT IN THE BOUGHS OF AN OAK TREE 335
158. DANIEL REFUSES TO EAT THE KING'S MEAT 337
159. THE PRODIGAL SON 340
160. ELEAZAR REFUSES TO EAT SWINE'S FLESH 341
161. A MOTHER AND HER SEVEN SONS TORTURED FOR REFUSING
TO EAT SWINE'S FLESH 342
162. THE EVIL SPIRITS ENTER A HERD OR SWINE 343
163. WILD BOARS DEVOURING THE CARCASE OF A DEER 344
164. WILD BOARS 345
165. WILD BOARS DESTROYING A VINEYARD 347
166. INDIAN ELEPHANT 349
167. KING SOLOMON, SEATED UPON HIS THRONE, RECEIVES THE
QUEEN OF SHEBA 350
168. INDIAN ELEPHANTS 351
169. THE WAR-ELEPHANT 355
170. AFRICAN ELEPHANTS 359
171. ELEPHANTS' WATERING-PLACE 361
172. TIGER 363
173. TIGER IN THE REEDS 364
174. HEAD OF TIGER 365
175. THE HYRAX 367
176. HIPPOPOTAMUS 372
177. HIPPOPOTAMUS POOL 375
178. THE GREAT JAWS OF THE HIPPOPOTAMUS 376
179. HIPPOPOTAMUS EMERGING FROM THE RIVER 377
180. HIPPOPOTAMUS EATING GRASS 379
181. A HIPPOPOTAMUS-HUNT IN EGYPT 381
182. HIPPOPOTAMUS AND TRAP 384
183. THE BABOON 387
184. THE RHESUS MONKEY 389
185. FEEDING THE MONKEYS IN INDIA 390
186. TROUBLESOME NEIGHBORS 391
187. MONKEYS ENTERING A PLANTATION 392
188. SLOTHFUL MONKEYS 393
189. A PRIVILEGED RACE 394
190. THE WANDEROO 396
191. THE ENEMY DISCOVERED 397
192. BONNET MONKEYS 399
193. THE BAT 401
194. BATS' RESTING-PLACE 403
195. GREAT FOX-HEADED BAT, OR FLYING FOX 405
196. CAVE NEAR THE SITE OF ANCIENT JERICHO 406
197. NIGHT IN THE TROPICS 407
198. LEOPARDS 408
199. THE HOME OF THE VULTURE 411
200. The LÄMMERGEIER 412
201. A SUCCESSFUL DEFENCE 415
202. STRUCK FROM A DIZZY HEIGHT 417
203. THE VULTURE'S NEST 418
204. THE EGYPTIAN VULTURE, OR GIER EAGLE 420
205. VULTURES 425
206. THE EAGLE AND THE HARE 430
207. EAGLES 432
208. EAGLE RETURNING TO THE NEST WITH HER PREY 435
209. THE OSPREY SEARCHING FOR FISH 437
210. SNATCHED FROM THE DEEP: THE OSPREY RISES WITH HIS
PREY 439
211. THE KITE, OR VULTURE OF SCRIPTURE 441
212. THE PEREGRINE FALCON, OR GLEDE 444
213. THE LANNER FALCON 446
214. THE HAWK 447
215. KESTREL HOVERING OVER A FIELD IN SEARCH OF PREY 449
216. THE WIND-HOVER, OR KESTREL 450
217. THE BARN OWL 454
218. THE LITTLE OWL 456
219. CAUGHT NAPPING 457
220. RAVEN.--BARN OWL.--EAGLE OWL 459
221. A FAMILY COUNCIL 460
222. THE NIGHT HAWK ON THE WING 462
223. THE NIGHT HAWK 463
224. THE SWALLOW 466
225. LOST FROM THE FLOCK 469
226. THE SWALLOW AND SWIFT 471
227. VIEW OF THE SEA OF GALILEE 472
228. THE SWALLOW'S FAVORITE HAUNT 473
229. SWALLOWS AT HOME 475
230. THE HOOPOE 478
231. EASTERN HOUSETOPS 479
232. READING THE LAW TO THE PEOPLE AFTER THE RETURN
FROM CAPTIVITY 482
233. THE BLUE THRUSH, OR SPARROW OF SCRIPTURE 483
234. THE TREE SPARROW 485
235. SPARROWS 486
236. A FOREST SCENE 487
237. THE GREAT SPOTTED CUCKOO 488
238. NOAH RECEIVES THE DOVE 489
239. JESUS DRIVES OUT OF THE TEMPLE THE MONEYCHANGERS
AND THOSE WHO SOLD DOVES 493
240. THE ROCK DOVE 494
241. BLUE ROCK PIGEONS 495
242. THE TURTLE DOVE 497
243. THE HEN AND HER BROOD 498
244. THE DOMESTIC FOWL 499
245. POULTRY 500
246. THE PEACOCK 501
247. PEAFOWL 503
248. FEATHERS OF THE PEACOCK 504
249. PARTRIDGES 505
250. THE GREEK PARTRIDGE 507
251. PARTRIDGE AND THEIR YOUNG 508
252. EASTERN QUAIL 509
253. THE QUAIL 510
254. FLIGHT OF QUAIL 515
255. THE RAVEN 517
256. ELIJAH FED BY RAVENS 518
257. RAVENS' ROOSTING-PLACE 521
258. RAVENS' NEST 522
259. OSTRICH AND NEST 527
260. ARABS HUNTING THE OSTRICH 533
261. THE BITTERN 537
262. BITTERN AND CORMORANT 539
263. THE HOME OF THE BITTERN 541
264. THE HERON 543
265. THE HOME OF THE HERON 545
266. THE PAPYRUS PLANT 548
267. THE HOME OF THE CRANE 549
268. THE CRANE 550
269. THE STORK 553
270. STORKS AND THEIR NESTS 555
271. A NEST OF THE WHITE STORK 559
272. IBIS AND GALLINULE 561
273. THE PELICAN 568
274. LIZARDS 575
275. TORTOISES 577
276. THE DHUBB AND THE TORTOISE 578
277. WATER TORTOISE 579
278. CROCODILE ATTACKING HORSES 587
279. A CROCODILE POOL OF ANCIENT EGYPT 590
280. CROCODILES OF THE UPPER NILE 591
281. ICHNEUMON DEVOURING THE EGGS OF THE CROCODILE 597
282. A CROCODILE TRAP 599
283. A FIGHT FOR LIFE 601
284. THE CYPRIUS, OR LIZARD 602
285. THE CHAMELEON 605
286. GECKO AND CHAMELEON 606
287. THE GECKO 609
288. SERPENTS 611
289. BOA CONSTRICTOR AND TIGER 613
290. COBRA AND CERASTES 615
291. THE ISRAELITES ARE BITTEN BY SERPENTS IN THE WILDERNESS,
AND MOSES LIFTS UP THE SERPENT OF BRASS 616
292. THE SERPENT-CHARMER 619
293. THE VIPER 621
294. TEACHING COBRAS TO DANCE 623
295. HORNED VIPER 625
296. THE VIPER, OR EPHEH 627
297. THE TOXICOA 628
298. THE FROG 630
299. FISHES 633
300. A RIVER SCENE 635
301. PETER CATCHES THE FISH 636
302. MURÆNA, LONG-HEADED BARBEL, AND SHEAT FISH 638
303. SUCKING FISH, TUNNY, AND CORYPHENE 640
304. FISHING SCENE ON THE SEA OF GALILEE 642
305. MODE OF DRAGGING THE SEINE NET 645
306. NILE PERCH, SURMULLET, AND STAR-GAZER 647
307. THE PEARL OYSTER 653
308. INSECTS 655
309. A SWARM OF LOCUSTS 659
310. THE LOCUST 663
311. THE BEE 665
312. THE HORNET AND ITS NEST 669
313. ANTS ON THE MARCH 671
314. ANT OF PALESTINE 675
315. THE CRIMSON WORM 677
316. MORDECAI IS LED THROUGH THE CITY UPON THE KING'S
HORSE 679
317. BUTTERFLIES OF PALESTINE 682
318. NOXIOUS FLIES OF PALESTINE 685
319. THE SCORPION 690
320. CORAL 694
[Illustration: more animals]
STORY OF THE BIBLE ANIMALS.
THE LION.
Frequent mention of the Lion in the Scriptures--The Lion
employed as an emblem in the Bible--Similarity of the African
and Asiatic species--The chief characteristics of the Lion--its
strength, activity, and mode of seizing its prey--The Lion hunt.
Of all the undomesticated animals of Palestine, none is mentioned so
frequently as the LION. This may appear the more remarkable, because
for many years the Lion has been extinct in Palestine. The leopard,
the wolf, the jackal, and the hyæna, still retain their place in
the land, although their numbers are comparatively few; but the
Lion has vanished completely out of the land. The reason for this
disappearance is twofold, first, the thicker population; and second,
the introduction of firearms.
No animal is less tolerant of human society than the Lion. In
the first place, it dreads the very face of man, and as a rule,
whenever it sees a man will slink away and hide itself. There are,
of course, exceptional cases to this rule. Sometimes a Lion becomes
so old and stiff, his teeth are so worn, and his endurance so
slight, that he is unable to chase his usual prey, and is obliged
to seek for other means of subsistence. In an unpopulated district,
he would simply be starved to death, but when his lot is cast in
the neighbourhood of human beings, he is perforce obliged to become
a "man-eater." Even in that case, a Lion will seldom attack a man,
unless he should be able to do so unseen, but will hang about the
villages, pouncing on the women as they come to the wells for water,
or upon the little children as they stray from their parents, and
continually shifting his quarters lest he should be assailed during
his sleep. The Lion requires a very large tract of country for his
maintenance, and the consequence is, that in proportion as the land
is populated does the number of Lions decrease.
Firearms are the special dread of the Lion. In the first place, the
Lion, like all wild beasts, cannot endure fire, and the flash of the
gun terrifies him greatly. Then, there is the report, surpassing
even his roar in resonance; and lastly, there is the unseen bullet,
which seldom kills him at once, but mostly drives him to furious
anger by the pain of his wound, yet which he does not dread nearly
so much as the harmless flash and report. There is another cause of
the Lion's banishment from the Holy Land. It is well known that to
attract any wild beast or bird to some definite spot, all that is
required is to provide them with a suitable and undisturbed home,
and a certainty of food. Consequently, the surest method of driving
them away is to deprive them of both these essentials. Then the Lion
used to live in forests, which formerly stretched over large tracts
of ground, but which have long since been cut down, thus depriving
the Lion of its home, while the thick population and the general use
of firearms have deprived him of his food. In fact, the Lion has
been driven out of Palestine, just as the wolf has been extirpated
from England.
But, in the olden times, Lions must have been very plentiful.
There is scarcely a book in the Bible, whether of the Old or New
Testaments, whether historical or prophetical, that does not contain
some mention of this terrible animal; sometimes describing the
actions of individual Lions, but mostly using the word as an
emblem of strength and force, whether used for a good purpose or
abused for a bad one.
[Illustration: LION DRINKING AT A POOL.]
[Illustration: A LION KILLS THE PROPHET FROM JUDAH.]
There are several varieties of Lion, which may be reduced to two,
namely, the African and the Asiatic Lion. It is almost certain,
however, that these animals really are one and the same species,
and that the trifling differences which exist between an African
and an Asiatic Lion, are not sufficient to justify a naturalist in
considering them to be distinct species. The habits of both are
identical, modified, as is sure to be the case, by the difference of
locality; but then, such variations in habit are continually seen in
animals confessedly of the same species, which happen to be placed
in different conditions of climate and locality.
That it was once exceedingly plentiful in Palestine is evident, from
a very cursory knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. It is every where
mentioned as a well-known animal, equally familiar and dreaded. When
the disobedient prophet was killed by the Lion near Bethel, the fact
seemed not to have caused any surprise in the neighbourhood. When
the people came out to rescue the body of the prophet, they wondered
much because the Lion was standing by the fallen man, but had not
torn him, and had left the ass unhurt. But that a Lion should have
killed a man seems to have been an event which was not sufficiently
rare to be surprising.
We will now proceed to those characteristics of the Lion which bear
especial reference to the Scriptures.
In the first place, size for size, the Lion is one of the strongest
of beasts.
[Illustration: LION AND TIGER.]
Moreover, the strength of the Lion is equally distributed over the
body and limbs, giving to the animal an easy grace of movement which
is rare except with such a structure. A full-grown Lion cannot only
knock down and kill, but can carry away in its mouth, an ordinary
ox; and one of these terrible animals has been known to pick up a
heifer in its mouth, and to leap over a wide ditch still carrying
its burden. Another Lion carried a two-year old heifer, and was
chased for five hours by mounted farmers, so that it must have
traversed a very considerable distance. Yet, in the whole of this
long journey, the legs of the heifer had only two or three times
touched the ground.
It kills man, and comparatively small animals, such as deer and
antelopes, with a blow of its terrible paw; and often needs to
give no second blow to cause the death of its victim. The sharp
talons are not needed to cause death, for the weight of the blow is
sufficient for that purpose.
When the hunter pursues it with dogs, after the usual fashion,
there is often a great slaughter among them, especially among those
that are inexperienced in the chase of the Lion. Urged by their
instinctive antipathy, the dogs rush forward to the spot where the
Lion awaits them, and old hounds bay at him from a safe distance,
while the young and inexperienced among them are apt to convert the
sham attack into a real one. Their valour meets with a poor reward,
for a few blows from the Lion's terrible paws send his assailants
flying in all directions, their bodies streaming with blood, and in
most cases a fatal damage inflicted, while more than one unfortunate
dog lies fairly crushed by the weight of a paw laid with apparent
carelessness upon its body. There is before me a Lion's skin, a
spoil of one of these animals shot by the celebrated sportsman,
Gordon Cumming. Although the skin lies flat upon the floor, and the
paws are nothing but the skin and talons, the weight of each paw is
very considerable, and always surprises those who hear it fall on
the floor.
There are several Hebrew words which are used for the Lion, but
that which signifies the animal in its adult state is derived from
an Arabic word signifying strength; and therefore the Lion is
called the Strong-one, just as the Bat is called the Night-flier.
No epithet could be better deserved, for the Lion seems to be a
very incarnation of strength, and, even when dead, gives as vivid
an idea of concentrated power as when it was living. And, when the
skin is stripped from the body, the tremendous muscular development
never fails to create a sensation of awe. The muscles of the limbs,
themselves so hard as to blunt the keen-edged knives employed by a
dissecter, are enveloped in their glittering sheaths, playing upon
each other like well-oiled machinery, and terminating in tendons
seemingly strong as steel, and nearly as impervious to the knife.
Not until the skin is removed can any one form a conception of the
enormously powerful muscles of the neck, which enable the Lion to
lift the weighty prey which it kills, and to convey it to a place
of security.
[Illustration: THE LION REPLIES TO THE THUNDER.]
Although usually unwilling to attack an armed man, it is one of the
most courageous animals in existence when it is driven to fight, and
if its anger is excited, it cares little for the number of its foes,
or the weapons with which they are armed. Even the dreaded firearms
lose their terrors to an angry Lion, while a Lioness, who fears
for the safety of her young, is simply the most terrible animal
in existence. We know how even a hen will fight for her chickens,
and how she has been known to beat off the fox and the hawk by the
reckless fury of her attack. It may be easily imagined, therefore,
that a Lioness actuated by equal courage, and possessed of the
terrible weapons given to her by her Creator, would be an animal
almost too formidable for the conception of those who have not
actually witnessed the scene of a Lioness defending her little ones.
The roar of the Lion is another of the characteristics for which it
is celebrated. There is no beast that can produce a sound that could
for a moment be mistaken for the roar of the Lion. The Lion has a
habit of stooping his head towards the ground when he roars, so
that the terrible sound rolls along like thunder, and reverberates
in many an echo in the far distance. Owing to this curious habit,
the roar can be heard at a very great distance, but its locality
is rendered uncertain, and it is often difficult to be quite sure
whether the Lion is to the right or the left of the hearer.
There are few sounds which strike more awe than the Lion's roar.
Even at the Zoological Gardens, where the hearer knows that he is in
perfect safety, and where the Lion is enclosed in a small cage faced
with strong iron bars, the sound of the terrible roar always has
a curious effect upon the nerves. It is not exactly fear, because
the hearer knows that he is safe; but it is somewhat akin to the
feeling of mixed awe and admiration with which one listens to the
crashing thunder after the lightning has sped its course. If such be
the case when the Lion is safely housed in a cage, and is moreover
so tame that even if he did escape, he would be led back by the
keeper without doing any harm, the effect of the roar must indeed be
terrific when the Lion is at liberty, when he is in his own country,
and when the shades of evening prevent him from being seen even at a
short distance.
[Illustration: LIONESS AND YOUNG.]
In the dark, there is no animal so invisible as a Lion. Almost
every hunter has told a similar story--of the Lion's approach at
night, of the terror displayed by dogs and cattle as he drew near,
and of the utter inability to see him, though he was so close that
they could hear his breathing. Sometimes, when he has crept near
an encampment, or close to a cattle inclosure, he does not proceed
any farther lest he should venture within the radius illumined by
the rays of the fire. So he crouches closely to the ground, and,
in the semi-darkness, looks so like a large stone, or a little
hillock, that any one might pass close to it without perceiving its
real nature. This gives the opportunity for which the Lion has been
watching, and in a moment he strikes down the careless straggler,
and carries off his prey to the den. Sometimes, when very much
excited, he accompanies the charge with a roar, but, as a general
fact, he secures his prey in silence.
The roar of the Lion is very peculiar. It is not a mere outburst of
sound, but a curiously graduated performance. No description of the
Lion's roar is so vivid, so true, and so graphic as that of Gordon
Cumming: "One of the most striking things connected with the Lion
is his voice, which is extremely grand and peculiarly striking.
It consists at times of a low, deep moaning, repeated five or six
times, ending in faintly audible sighs. At other times he startles
the forest with loud, deep-toned, solemn roars, repeated five or six
times in quick succession, each increasing in loudness to the third
or fourth, when his voice dies away in five or six low, muffled
sounds, very much resembling distant thunder. As a general rule,
Lions roar during the night, their sighing moans commencing as the
shades of evening envelop the forest, and continuing at intervals
throughout the night. In distant and secluded regions, however, I
have constantly heard them roaring loudly as late as nine or ten
o'clock on a bright sunny morning. In hazy and rainy weather they
are to be heard at every hour in the day, but their roar is subdued."
Lastly, we come to the dwelling-place of the Lion. This animal
always fixes its residence in the depths of some forest, through
which it threads its stealthy way with admirable certainty. No fox
knows every hedgerow, ditch, drain, and covert better than the
Lion knows the whole country around his den. Each Lion seems to
have his peculiar district, in which only himself and his family
will be found. These animals seem to parcel out the neighbourhood
among themselves by a tacit law like that which the dogs of eastern
countries have imposed upon themselves, and which forbids them to
go out of the district in which they were born. During the night he
traverses his dominions; and, as a rule, he retires to his den as
soon as the sun is fairly above the horizon. Sometimes he will be
in wait for prey in the broadest daylight, but his ordinary habits
are nocturnal, and in the daytime he is usually asleep in his secret
dwelling-place.
We will now glance at a few of the passages in which the Lion is
mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, selecting those which treat of its
various characteristics.
The terrible strength of the Lion is the subject of repeated
reference. In the magnificent series of prophecies uttered by
Jacob on his deathbed, the power of the princely tribe of Judah
is predicted under the metaphor of a Lion--the beginning of its
power as a Lion's whelp, the fulness of its strength as an adult
Lion, and its matured establishment in power as the old Lion that
couches himself and none dares to disturb him. Then Solomon, in the
Proverbs, speaks of the Lion as the "strongest among beasts, and
that turneth not away for any."
Solomon also alludes to its courage in the same book, Prov.
xxviii. 1, in the well-known passage, "The wicked fleeth when no
man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion." And, in 2
Sam. xxiii. 20, the courage of Benaiah, one of the mighty three of
David's army, is specially honoured, because he fought and killed a
Lion single-handed, and because he conquered "two lion-like men of
Moab." David, their leader, had also distinguished himself, when a
mere keeper of cattle, by pursuing and killing a Lion that had come
to plunder his herd. In the same book of Samuel which has just been
quoted (xvii. 10), the valiant men are metaphorically described as
having the hearts of Lions.
The ferocity of this terrible beast of prey is repeatedly mentioned,
and the Psalms are full of such allusions, the fury and anger of
enemies being compared to the attacks of the Lion.
Many passages refer to the Lion's roar, and it is remarkable that
the Hebrew language contains several words by which the different
kind of roar is described. One word, for example, represents the
low, deep, thunder-like roar of the Lion seeking its prey, and which
has already been mentioned. This is the word which is used in Amos
iii. 4, "Will a lion roar in the forest when he hath no prey?" and
in this passage the word which is translated as Lion signifies the
animal when full grown and in the prime of life. Another word is
used to signify the sudden exulting cry of the Lion as it leaps
upon its victim. A third is used for the angry growl with which a
Lion resents any endeavour to deprive it of its prey, a sound with
which we are all familiar, on a miniature scale, when we hear a cat
growling over a mouse which she has just caught. The fourth term
signifies the peculiar roar uttered by the young Lion after it has
ceased to be a cub and before it has attained maturity. This last
term is employed in Jer. li. 38, "They shall _roar_ together like
lions; they shall _yell_ as lions' whelps," in which passage two
distinct words are used, one signifying the roar of the Lion when
searching after prey, and the other the cry of the young Lions.
The prophet Amos, who in his capacity of herdsman was familiar
with the wild beasts, from which he had to guard his cattle, makes
frequent mention of the Lion, and does so with a force and vigour
that betoken practical experience. How powerful is this imagery,
"The lion hath roared; who will not fear? The Lord God hath spoken;
who can but prophesy?" Here we have the picture of the man himself,
the herdsman and prophet, who had trembled many a night, as the
Lions drew nearer and nearer; and who heard the voice of the Lord,
and his lips poured out prophecy. Nothing can be more complete than
the parallel which he has drawn. It breathes the very spirit of
piety, and may bear comparison even with the prophecies of Isaiah
for its simple grandeur.
It is remarkable how the sacred writers have entered into the spirit
of the world around them, and how closely they observed the minutest
details even in the lives of the brute beasts. There is a powerful
passage in the book of Job, iv. 11, "The old lion perisheth for lack
of prey," in which the writer betrays his thorough knowledge of the
habits of the animal, and is aware that the usual mode of a Lion's
death is through hunger, in consequence of his increasing inability
to catch prey.
The nocturnal habits of the Lion and its custom of lying in wait
for prey are often mentioned in the Scriptures. The former habit is
spoken of in that familiar and beautiful passage in the Psalms (civ.
20), "Thou makest darkness, and it is night; wherein all the beasts
of the forest do creep forth. The young Lions roar after their
prey; and seek their meat from God. The sun ariseth, they gather
themselves together, and lay them down in their dens."
[Illustration: LION CARRYING HOME SUPPLIES.]
An animal so destructive among the flocks and herds could not be
allowed to carry out its depredations unchecked, and as we have
already seen, the warfare waged against it has been so successful,
that the Lions have long ago been fairly extirpated in Palestine.
The usual method of capturing or killing the Lion was by pitfalls or
nets, to both of which there are many references in the Scriptures.
The mode of hunting the Lion with nets was identical with that which
is practised in India at the present time. The precise locality of
the Lion's dwelling-place having been discovered, a circular wall
of net is arranged round it, or if only a few nets can be obtained,
they are set in a curved form, the concave side being towards the
Lion. They then send dogs into the thicket, hurl stones and sticks
at the den, shoot arrows into it, fling burning torches at it, and
so irritate and alarm the animal that it rushes against the net,
which is so made that it falls down and envelopes the animal in its
folds. If the nets be few, the drivers go to the opposite side of
the den, and induce the Lion to escape in the direction where he
sees no foes, but where he is sure to run against the treacherous
net. Other large and dangerous animals were also captured by the
same means.
[Illustration: AFRICAN LIONS.]
Another and more common, because an easier and a cheaper method was,
by digging a deep pit, covering the mouth with a slight covering
of sticks and earth, and driving the animal upon the treacherous
covering. It is an easier method than the net, because after the pit
is once dug, the only trouble lies in throwing the covering over
its mouth. But, it is not so well adapted for taking beasts alive,
as they are likely to be damaged, either by the fall into the pit,
or by the means used in getting them out again. Animals, therefore,
that are caught in pits are generally, though not always, killed
before they are taken out. The net, however, envelops the animal so
perfectly, and renders it so helpless, that it can be easily bound
and taken away. The hunting net is very expensive, and requires a
large staff of men to work it, so that none but a rich man could use
it in hunting.
The passages in which allusion is made to the use of the pitfall in
hunting are too numerous to be quoted, and it will be sufficient
to mention one or two passages, such as those wherein the Psalmist
laments that his enemies have hidden for him their net in a pit, and
that the proud have digged pits for him.
Lions that were taken in nets seem to have been kept alive in dens,
either as mere curiosities, or as instruments of royal vengeance.
Such seems to have been the object of the Lions which were kept by
Darius, into whose den Daniel was thrown, by royal command, and
which afterwards killed his accusers when thrown into the same den.
It is plain that the Lions kept by Darius must have been exceedingly
numerous, because they killed at once the accusers of Daniel, who
were many in number, together with their wives and children, who,
in accordance with the cruel custom of that age and country, were
partakers of the same punishment with the real culprits. The whole
of the first part of Ezek. xix. alludes to the custom of taking
Lions alive and keeping them in durance afterwards.
Sometimes the Lion was hunted as a sport, but this amusement
seems to have been restricted to the great men, on account of its
expensive nature. Such hunting scenes are graphically depicted in
the famous Nineveh sculptures, which represent the hunters pursuing
their mighty game in chariots, and destroying them with arrows.
Rude, and even conventional as are these sculptures, they have a
spirit, a force, and a truthfulness, that prove them to have been
designed by artists to whom the scene was a familiar one.
[Illustration: THE LION ATTACKS THE HERD.]
Upon the African Continent the Lion reigns supreme, monarch of the
feline race.
Whatever may be said of the distinction between the Asiatic and
African Lion, there seems to be scarcely sufficient grounds for
considering the very slight differences a sufficient warrant for
constituting separate species. From all accounts, it seems that
the habits of all Lions are very similar, and that a Lion acts
like a Lion whether found in Africa or Asia.
[Illustration: THE LAIR OF THE LION.]
An old Boer, as the Dutch settlers of Southern Africa are called,
gave me a most interesting account of an adventure with a Lion.
The man was a well-known hunter, and lived principally by the sale
of ivory and skins. He was accustomed each year to make a trip into
the game country, and traded with the Kaffirs, or native blacks,
under very favorable auspices. His stock in trade consisted of guns
and ammunition, several spans of fine oxen, some horses, and about a
dozen dogs.
A Lion which appeared to have been roaming about the country
happened to pass near this hunter's camp, and scenting the horses
and oxen, evidently thought that the location would suit him for
a short period. A dense wood situated about a mile from the camp
afforded shelter, and this spot the Lion selected as a favorable
position for his headquarters.
The hunter had not to wait for more than a day, before the
suspicions which had been aroused by some broad footmarks, which he
saw imprinted in the soil, were confirmed into a certainty that a
large Lion was concealed near his residence.
It now became a question of policy whether the Boer should attack
the Lion, or wait for the Lion to attack him. He thought it possible
that the savage beast, having been warned off by the dogs, whose
barking had been continued and furious during the night on which the
Lion was supposed to have passed, might think discretion the better
part of valor, and consequently would move farther on, in search of
a less carefully guarded locality upon which to quarter himself. He
determined, therefore, to wait, but to use every precaution against
a night-surprise.
The Lion, however, was more than a match for the man; for during the
second night a strong ox from his best span was quietly carried off,
and, although there was some commotion among the dogs and cattle, it
was then thought that the alarm had scared the Lion away.
The morning light, however, showed that the beast had leaped the
fence which surrounded the camp, and, having killed the ox, had
evidently endeavored to scramble over it again with the ox in his
possession. The weight of the Lion and the ox had caused the stakes
to give way, and the Lion had easily carried off his prey through
the aperture.
The track of the Lion was immediately followed by the Boer, who took
with him a negro and half a dozen of his best dogs. The tracks were
easily seen, and the hunter had no difficulty in deciding that the
Lion was in the wood previously mentioned. But this in itself was no
great advance, for the place was overgrown with a dense thicket of
thorn-bushes, creepers, and long grass, forming a jungle so thick
and impenetrable that for a man to enter seemed almost impossible.
It was therefore agreed that the Boer should station himself on one
side, while the negro went to the other side of the jungle, the dogs
meanwhile being sent into the thicket.
This arrangement, it was hoped, would enable either the hunter or
the negro to obtain a shot; for they concluded that the dogs, which
were very courageous animals, would drive the Lion out of the bushes.
The excited barking of the dogs soon indicated that they had
discovered the Lion, but they appeared to be unable to drive him
from his stronghold; for, although they would scamper away every now
and then, as though the enraged monster was chasing them, still they
returned to bark at the same spot.
Both of the hunters fired several shots, with the hope that a stray
bullet might find its way through the underwood to the heart of the
savage beast, but a great quantity of ammunition was expended and no
result achieved.
At length, as the dogs had almost ceased to bark, it was considered
advisable to call them off. But all the whistling and shouting
failed to recall more than two out of the six, and one of these was
fearfully wounded. The others, it was afterwards found, had been
killed by the Lion: a blow from his paw had sufficed to break the
back or smash the skull of all which had come within his reach.
Thus the first attempt on the Lion was a total failure, and the
hunter returned home lamenting the loss of his dogs, and during the
night watched beside his enclosure; but the Lion did not pay him a
second visit.
Early on the following evening, accompanied by the negro, he started
afresh for the wood; and, having marked the spot from which the Lion
had on the former occasion quitted the dense thorny jungle, the two
hunters ascended a tree and watched during the whole night in the
hope of obtaining a shot at the hated marauder. But while they
were paying the residence of the Lion a visit _he_ favored the camp
with a call, and this time, by way of variety, carried away a very
valuable horse, which he conveyed to the wood, being wise enough
to walk out and to return by a different path from that he had
previously used, consequently avoiding the ambush prepared for him.
When the hunter returned to his camp, he was furious at this new
loss, and determined upon a plan which, though dangerous, still
appeared the most likely to insure the destruction of the ravenous
monster.
This plan was to enter the wood alone, without attendant or dogs,
and with noiseless, stealthy movements creep near enough to the Lion
to obtain a shot.
Now, when we consider the difficulty of moving through thick bushes
without making a noise, and remember the watchful habits of every
member of the cat tribe, we may be certain that to surprise the Lion
was a matter of extreme difficulty, and that the probability was
that the hunter would meet with disaster.
At about ten o'clock on the morning after the horse-slaughter,
the hunter started for the wood armed with a double-barrelled
smooth-bore gun, and prepared to put forth his utmost skill in
stalking his dangerous enemy.
Now, it is the nature of the Lion, when gorged, to sleep during the
day; and if the animal has carried off any prey, it usually conceals
itself near the remnants of its feast, to watch them until ready for
another meal.
The hunter was aware of this, and laid his plans very judiciously.
He approached the wood slowly and silently, found the track of the
Lion, and began tracing it to find the spot where the remains of the
horse could be seen.
He moved forward very slowly and with great caution, being soon
surrounded by the thick bushes, the brightness of the plain also
being succeeded by the deep gloom of the wood. Being an experienced
hand at bush-craft, he was able to walk or crawl without causing
either a dried stick to crack or a leaf to rustle, and he was aware
that his progress was without noise; for the small birds, usually so
watchful and alert, flew away only when he approached close to them,
thus showing that their eyes, and not their ears, had made them
conscious of the presence of man.
Birds and monkeys are the great obstacles in the bush to the
success of a surprise, for the birds fly from tree to tree and
whistle or twitter, whilst the monkeys chatter and grimace,
expressing by all sorts of actions that a strange creature is
approaching. When, therefore, the bushranger finds that birds and
monkeys are unconscious of his presence until they see him, he may
be satisfied that he has traversed the bush with tolerable silence,
and has vanquished such dangerous betrayers of his presence as dried
sticks and dead leaves.
[Illustration: THE LION LISTENS TO THE APPROACH OF THE HUNTER.]
The hunter had not proceeded thus more than fifty yards into the
jungle, before he found indications that he was close upon the lair
of the Lion: a strong leonine scent was noticeable, and part of
the carcase of his horse was visible between the bushes. Instead,
therefore, of advancing farther, as an incautious or inexperienced
bushranger would have done, he crouched down behind a bush and
remained motionless.
All animals are aware of the advantages of a surprise, and the
cat tribe especially practise the ambuscading system. The hunter,
therefore, determined, if possible, to turn the tables on the Lion,
and to surprise, rather than to be surprised.
He concluded that the Lion, even when gorged with horseflesh, would
not be so neglectful of his safety as to sleep with more than one
eye closed, and that, although he had crept with great care through
the bush, he had probably, from some slight sound, caused the Lion
to be on the alert; if, therefore, he should approach the carcase of
the horse, he might be pounced upon at once.
After remaining silent and watchful for several minutes, the hunter
at length saw that an indistinctly-outlined object was moving behind
some large broad-leafed plants at about twenty paces from him.
This object was the Lion. It was crouched behind some shrubs,
attentively watching the bushes where the hunter was concealed. Its
head only was clearly visible, the body being hidden by the foliage.
It was evident that the Lion was suspicious of something, but was
not certain that anything had approached.
The hunter, knowing that this was a critical period for him,
remained perfectly quiet. He did not like to risk a shot at the
forehead of the Lion, for it would require a very sure aim to insure
a death-wound, and the number of twigs and branches would be almost
certain to deflect the bullet.
The Lion, after a careful inspection, appeared to be satisfied, and
laid down behind the shrubs. The hunter then cocked both barrels
of his heavy gun and turned the muzzle slowly around, so that he
covered the spot on which the Lion lay, and shifted his position so
as to be well placed for a shot.
The slight noise he made in moving, attracted the attention of the
Lion, who immediately rose to his feet. A broadside shot, which was
the most sure, could not be obtained, so the hunter fired at the
head of the animal, aiming for a spot between the eyes. The ball
struck high, as is usually the case when the distance is short, and
the charge of powder heavy, but the Lion fell over on its back,
rising, however, almost immediately and uttering a terrific roar.
In regaining its feet it turned its side to the hunter, giving him
the opportunity he had so anxiously waited for. Aiming at a spot
behind the shoulder, he fired again, and had the satisfaction of
seeing the savage beast, maddened by the pain of a mortal wound,
tearing up the ground in its fury within a very few paces of his
hiding-place.
By degrees its fierce roars subsided into angry growls, and the
growls into heavy moans, until the terrible voice was hushed and
silence reigned throughout the wood.
The hunter immediately started off home, and brought his negroes and
dogs to the spot, where they found stretched dead upon the ground a
Lion of the largest size.
Before sunset that evening its skin was pegged down at the hunter's
camp, and all were filled with delight, knowing that they would be
no more disturbed by the fierce marauder.
THE LEOPARD.
The Leopard not often mentioned in the Scriptures--its
attributes exactly described--Probability that several animals
were classed under the name--How the Leopard takes its
prey--Craft of the Leopard--its ravages among the flocks--The
empire of man over the beast--The Leopard at Bay--Localities
wherein the Leopard lives--The skin of the Leopard--Various
passages of Scripture explained.
Of the LEOPARD but little is said in the Holy Scriptures.
In the New Testament this animal is only mentioned once, and
then in a metaphorical rather than a literal sense. In the Old
Testament it is casually mentioned seven times, and only in two
places is the word Leopard used in the strictly literal sense.
Yet, in those brief passages of Holy Writ, the various attributes
of the animal are delineated with such fidelity, that no one could
doubt that the Leopard was familiarly known in Palestine. Its
colour, its swiftness, its craft, its ferocity, and the nature of
its dwelling-place, are all touched upon in a few short sentences
scattered throughout the Old Testament, and even its peculiar habits
are alluded to in a manner that proves it to have been well known at
the time when the words were written.
It is my purpose in the following pages to give a brief account of
the Leopard of the Scriptures, laying most stress on the qualities
to which allusion is made, and then to explain the passages in which
the name of the animal occurs.
In the first place, it is probable that under the word Leopard are
comprehended three animals, two of which, at least, were thought to
be one species until the time of Cuvier. These three animals are the
LEOPARD proper (_Leopardus varius_), the OUNCE (_Leopardus uncia_),
and the CHETAH, or HUNTING LEOPARD (_Gueparda jubata_). All these
three species belong to the same family of animals; all are spotted
and similar in colour, all are nearly alike in shape, and all are
inhabitants of Asia, while two of them, the Leopard and the Chetah,
are also found in Africa.
It is scarcely necessary to mention that the Leopard is a beast
of prey belonging to the cat tribe, that its colour is tawny,
variegated with rich black spots, and that it is a fierce and
voracious animal, almost equally dreaded by man and beast. It
inhabits many parts of Africa and Asia, and in those portions of
the country which are untenanted by mankind, it derives all its
sustenance from the herb-eating animals of the same tracts.
[Illustration: THE LEOPARD.]
To deer and antelopes it is a terrible enemy, and in spite of their
active limbs, seldom fails in obtaining its prey. Swift as is the
Leopard, for a short distance, and wonderful as its spring, it has
not the enduring speed of the deer or antelope, animals which are
specially formed for running, and which, if a limb is shattered,
can run nearly as fast and quite as far on three legs as they
can when all four limbs are uninjured. Instinctively knowing its
inferiority in the race, the Leopard supplies by cunning the want of
enduring speed.
It conceals itself in some spot whence it can see far around without
being seen, and thence surveys the country. A tree is the usual
spot selected for this purpose, and the Leopard, after climbing the
trunk by means of its curved talons, settles itself in the fork of
the branches, so that its body is hidden by the boughs, and only
its head is shown between them. With such scrupulous care does it
conceal itself, that none but a practised hunter can discover it,
while any one who is unaccustomed to the woods cannot see the animal
even when the tree is pointed out to him.
As soon as the Leopard sees the deer feeding at a distance, he
slips down the tree and stealthily glides off in their direction.
He has many difficulties to overcome, because the deer are among
the most watchful of animals, and if the Leopard were to approach
to the windward, they would scent him while he was yet a mile away
from them. If he were to show himself but for one moment in the
open ground he would be seen, and if he were but to shake a branch
or snap a dry twig he would be heard. So, he is obliged to approach
them against the wind, to keep himself under cover, and yet to
glide so carefully along that the heavy foliage of the underwood
shall not be shaken, and the dry sticks and leaves which strew the
ground shall not be broken. He has also to escape the observation of
certain birds and beasts which inhabit the woods, and which would
certainly set up their alarm-cry as soon as they saw him, and so
give warning to the wary deer, which can perfectly understand a cry
of alarm, from whatever animal it may happen to proceed.
Still, he proceeds steadily on his course, gliding from one covert
to another, and often expending several hours before he can proceed
for a mile. By degrees he contrives to come tolerably close to them,
and generally manages to conceal himself in some spot towards which
the deer are gradually feeding their way. As soon as they are near
enough, he collects himself for a spring, just as a cat does when
she leaps on a bird, and dashes towards the deer in a series of
mighty bounds. For a moment or two they are startled and paralysed
with fear at the sudden appearance of their enemy, and thus give
him time to get among them. Singling out some particular animal, he
leaps upon it, strikes it down with one blow of his paw, and then,
couching on the fallen animal, he tears open its throat, and laps
the flowing blood.
[Illustration: LEOPARD ATTACKING A HERD OF DEER.]
In this manner does it obtain its prey when it lives in the desert,
but when it happens to be in the neighbourhood of human habitations,
it acts in a different manner. Whenever man settles himself in any
place, his presence is a signal for the beasts of the desert and
forest to fly. The more timid, such as the deer and antelope, are
afraid of him, and betake themselves as far away as possible. The
more savage inhabitants of the land, such as the lion, leopard, and
other animals, wage an unequal war against him for a time, but are
continually driven farther and farther away, until at last they
are completely expelled from the country. The predaceous beasts
are, however, loth to retire, and do so by very slow degrees. They
can no longer support themselves on the deer and antelopes, but
find a simple substitute for them in the flocks and herds which
man introduces, and in the seizing of which there is as much craft
required as in the catching of the fleeter and wilder animals. Sheep
and goats cannot run away like the antelopes, but they are penned so
carefully within inclosures, and guarded so watchfully by herdsmen
and dogs, that the Leopard is obliged to exert no small amount of
cunning before it can obtain a meal.
Sometimes it creeps quietly to the fold, and escapes the notice of
the dogs, seizes upon a sheep, and makes off with it before the
alarm is given. Sometimes it hides by the wayside, and as the flock
pass by it dashes into the midst of them, snatches up a sheep, and
disappears among the underwood on the opposite side of the road.
Sometimes it is crafty enough to deprive the fold of its watchful
guardian. Dogs which are used to Leopard-hunting never attack the
animal, though they are rendered furious by the sound of its voice.
They dash at it as if they meant to devour it, but take very good
care to keep out of reach of its terrible paws. By continually
keeping the animal at bay, they give time for their master to come
up, and generally contrive to drive it into a tree, where it can be
shot.
But instances have been known where the Leopard has taken advantage
of the dogs, and carried them off in a very cunning manner. It
hides itself tolerably near the fold, and then begins to growl in a
low voice. The dogs think that they hear a Leopard at a distance,
and dash towards the sound with furious barks and yells. In so
doing, they are sure to pass by the hiding-place of the Leopard,
which springs upon them unawares, knocks one of them over, and
bounds away to its den in the woods. It does not content itself
with taking sheep or goats from the fold, but is also a terrible
despoiler of the hen-roosts, destroying great numbers in a single
night when once it contrives to find its way into the house.
[Illustration: THE LEOPARD LEAPS UPON HIS PREY.]
As an instance of the cunning which seems innate in the Leopard, I
may mention that whenever it takes up its abode near a village, it
does not meddle with the flocks and herds of its neighbours, but
prefers to go to some other village at a distance for food, thus
remaining unsuspected almost at the very doors of the houses.
In general, it does not willingly attack mankind, and at all events
seems rather to fear the presence of a full-grown man. But, when
wounded or irritated, all sense of fear is lost in an overpowering
rush of fury, and it then becomes as terrible a foe as the lion
himself. It is not so large nor so strong, but it is more agile
and quicker in its movements; and when it is seized with one of
these paroxysms of anger, the eye can scarcely follow it as it
darts here and there, striking with lightning rapidity, and dashing
at any foe within reach. Its whole shape seems to be transformed,
and absolutely to swell with anger; its eyes flash with fiery
lustre, its ears are thrown back on the head, and it continually
utters alternate snarls and yells of rage. It is hardly possible
to recognise the graceful, lithe glossy creature, whose walk is
so noiseless, and whose every movement is so easy, in the furious
passion-swollen animal that flies at every foe with blind fury, and
pours out sounds so fierce and menacing that few men, however well
armed, will care to face it.
As is the case with most of the cat tribe, the Leopard is an
excellent climber, and can ascend trees and traverse their boughs
without the least difficulty. It is so fond of trees, that it is
seldom to be seen except in a well-wooded district. Its favourite
residence is a forest where there is plenty of underwood, at least
six or seven feet in height, among which trees are sparingly
interspersed. When crouched in this cover it is practically
invisible, even though its body may be within arm's length of
a passenger. The spotted body harmonizes so perfectly with the
broken lights and deep shadows of the foliage that even a practised
hunter will not enter a covert in search of a Leopard unless he
is accompanied by dogs. The instinct which teaches the Leopard to
choose such localities is truly wonderful, and may be compared with
that of the tiger, which cares little for underwood, but haunts the
grass jungles, where the long, narrow blades harmonize with the
stripes which decorate its body.
[Illustration: WAITING.]
The skin of the Leopard has always been highly valued on account
of its beauty, and in Africa, at the present day, a robe made of
its spotted skin is as much an adjunct of royalty as is the ermine
the emblem of judicial dignity in England. In more ancient times, a
leopard skin was the official costume of a priest, the skin being
sometimes shaped into a garment, and sometimes thrown over the
shoulders and the paws crossed over the breast.
Such is a general history of the Leopard. We will now proceed to
the various passages in which it is mentioned, beginning with its
outward aspect.
In the first place, the Hebrew word Namer signifies "spotted," and
is given to the animal in allusion to its colours. The reader will
now see how forcible is the lament of Jeremiah, "Can the Ethiopian
change his skin, or the Leopard his spots?" Literally, "Can the
Ethiopian change his skin, or the spotted one his spots?"
The agility and swiftness of the Leopard are alluded to in the
prediction by the prophet Habakkuk of the vengeance that would
come upon Israel through the Chaldeans. In chap. i. 5, we read: "I
will work a work in your days, which ye will not believe though it
be told you. For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and
hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth of the land, to
possess the dwelling-places that are not theirs. They are terrible
and dreadful; their judgment and their dignity shall proceed of
themselves. Their horses also are swifter than the Leopards, and are
more fierce than the evening wolves."
The craftiness of the Leopard, and the manner in which it lies in
wait for its prey, are alluded to in more than one passage of Holy
Writ. Hosea the prophet alludes to the Leopard in a few simple
words which display an intimate acquaintance with the habits of this
formidable animal, and in this part of his prophecies he displays
that peculiar local tone which distinguishes his writings. Speaking
of the Israelites under the metaphor of a flock, or a herd, he
proceeds to say: "According to their pasture so were they filled;
they were filled, and their heart was exalted; therefore have they
forgotten me. Therefore I will be unto them as a lion, as a Leopard
by the way will I observe them." The reader will note the peculiar
force of this sentence, whereby God signifies that He will destroy
them openly, as a lion rushes on its prey, and that he will chastise
them unexpectedly, as if it were a Leopard crouching by the wayside,
and watching for the flock to pass, that it may spring on its prey
unexpectedly. The same habit of the Leopard is also alluded to by
Jeremiah, who employs precisely the same imagery as is used by
Habakkuk. See Jer. v. 5, 6, "These have altogether broken the yoke,
and burst the bonds. Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay
them, and a wolf of the evenings shall spoil them, a leopard shall
watch over their cities." It is evident from the employment of this
image by two prophets, the one being nearly a hundred years before
the other, that the crafty, insidious habits of the Leopard were
well known in Palestine, and that the metaphor would tell with full
force among those to whom it was addressed.
[Illustration: leopard]
[Illustration: cats]
THE CAT.
The Cat never mentioned by name in the canonical Scriptures,
and only once in the Apocrypha--The Cat domesticated among the
Egyptians, and trained in bird-catching--Neglected capabilities
of the Cat--Anecdote of an English Cat that caught fish for her
master--Presumed reason why the Scriptures are silent about the
Cat--The Cat mentioned by Baruch.
It is a very remarkable circumstance that the word CAT is not once
mentioned in the whole of the canonical Scriptures, and only once in
the Apocrypha.
The Egyptians, as is well known, kept Cats domesticated in their
houses, a fact which is mentioned by Herodotus, in his second book,
and the 66th and 67th chapters. After describing the various animals
which were kept and fed by this nation, he proceeds to narrate the
habits of the Cat, and writes as follows: "When a fire takes place,
a supernatural impulse seizes the cats. For the Egyptians, standing
at a distance, take care of the cats and neglect to quench the fire;
but the cats make their escape, and leaping over the men, cast
themselves into the fire, and when this occurs, great lamentations
are made among the Egyptians. In whatever house a cat dies of
a natural death, all the family shave their eyebrows. All cats
that die are carried to certain sacred houses, where, after being
embalmed, they are buried in the city of Bubastis."
Now, as many of those cat-mummies have been discovered in good
preservation, the species has been identified with the Egyptian
Cat of the present day, which is scientifically termed _Felis
maniculatus_. Not only did the Egyptians keep Cats at their houses,
but, as is shown by certain sculptures, took the animals with them
when they went bird-catching, and employed them in securing their
prey. Some persons have doubted this statement, saying, that in the
first place, the Cat is not possessed of sufficient intelligence
for the purpose; and that in the second place, as the hunter is
represented as catching wild fowl, the Cat would not be able to
assist him, because it would not enter the water. Neither objection
is valid, nor would have been made by a naturalist.
There are no grounds whatever for assuming that the Cat has not
sufficient intelligence to aid its master in hunting. On the
contrary, there are many familiar instances where the animal has
been trained, even in this country, to catch birds and other game,
and bring its prey home. By nature the Cat is an accomplished
hunter, and, like other animals of the same disposition, can be
taught to use its powers for mankind. We all know that the chetah,
a member of the same tribe, is in constant use at the present day,
and we learn from ancient sculptures that the lion was employed for
the same purpose. Passing from land to water, mankind has succeeded
in teaching the seal and the otter to plunge into the water, catch
their finny prey, and deliver it to their owners. Among predaceous
birds, we have trained the eagle, the falcon, and various hawks,
to assist us in hunting the finned and feathered tribes, while we
have succeeded in teaching the cormorant to catch fish for its
master, and not for itself. Why, then, should the Cat be excepted
from a rule so general? The fact is, the Cat has been, although
domesticated for so many centuries, a comparatively neglected
animal; and it is the fashion to heap upon it the contumacious
epithets of sullen, treacherous, selfish, spiteful, and intractable,
just as we take as our emblems of stupidity the ass and the goose,
which are really among the most cunning of the lower animals. We
have never tried to teach the Cat the art of hunting for her owners,
but that is no reason for asserting that the animal could not be
taught.
As to entering the water, every one who is familiar with the habits
of the Cat knows perfectly well that the Cat will voluntarily enter
water in chase of prey. A Cat does not like to wet her feet, and
will not enter the water without a very powerful reason, but when
that motive is supplied, she has no hesitation about it. A curious
and valuable confirmation of this fact appeared some time ago in
"The Field" newspaper, in which was recorded the history of an
old fisherman, whose Cat invariably went to sea with him, and as
invariably used to leap overboard, seize fish in her mouth, and
bring them to the side of the boat, where her kindly owner could
lift her out, together with the captured fish.
The Cat, then, having been the favoured companion of the Egyptians,
among whom the Israelites lived while they multiplied from a family
into a nation, it does seem very remarkable that the sacred writers
should not even mention it. There is no prohibition of the animal,
even indirectly, in the Mosaic law; but it may be the case that the
Israelites repudiated the Cat simply because it was so favoured by
their former masters.
[Illustration: cat]
THE DOG.
Antipathy displayed by Orientals towards the Dog, and
manifested throughout the Scriptures--Contrast between European
and Oriental Dogs--Habits of the Dogs of Palestine--The
City Dogs and their singular organization--The herdsman's
Dog--Various passages of Scripture--Dogs and the crumbs--their
numbers--Signor Pierotti's experience of the Dogs--Possibility
of their perfect domestication--The peculiar humiliation of
Lazarus--Voracity of the Wild Dogs--The fate of Ahab and
Jezebel--Anecdote of a volunteer Watch-dog--Innate affection of
the Dog towards mankind--Peculiar local Instinct of the Oriental
Dog--Albert Smith's account of the Dogs at Constantinople--The
Dervish and his Dogs--The Greyhound--Uncertainty of the word.
Scarcely changed by the lapse of centuries, the Oriental of the
present day retains most of the peculiarities which distinguished
him throughout the long series of years during which the books
of sacred Scripture were given to the world. In many of these
characteristics he differs essentially from Europeans of the present
day, and exhibits a tone of mind which seems to be not merely owing
to education, but to be innate and inherent in the race.
One of these remarkable characteristics is the strange loathing
with which he regards the Dog. In all other parts of the world, the
Dog is one of the most cherished and valued of animals, but among
those people whom we popularly class under the name of Orientals,
the Dog is detested and despised. As the sacred books were given
to the world through the mediumship of Orientals, we find that
this feeling towards the Dog is manifested whenever the animal is
mentioned; and whether we turn to the books of the Law, the splendid
poetry of the Psalms and the book of Job, the prophetical or the
historical portions of the Old Testament, we find the name of the
Dog repeatedly mentioned; and in every case in connexion with some
repulsive idea. If we turn from the Old to the New Testament, we
find the same idea manifested, whether in the Gospels, the Epistles,
or the Revelation.
To the mind of the true Oriental the very name of the Dog carries
with it an idea of something utterly repugnant to his nature,
and he does not particularly like even the thought of the animal
coming across his mind. And this is the more extraordinary, because
at the commencement and termination of their history the Dog was
esteemed by their masters. The Egyptians, under whose rule they
grew to be a nation, knew the value of the Dog, and showed their
appreciation in the many works of art which have survived to our
time. Then the Romans, under whose iron grasp the last vestiges of
nationality crumbled away, honoured and respected the Dog, made it
their companion, and introduced its portrait into their houses. But,
true to their early traditions, the Jews of the East have ever held
the Dog in the same abhorrence as is manifested by their present
masters, the followers of Mahommed.
Owing to the prevalence of this feeling, the Dogs of Oriental
towns are so unlike their more fortunate European relatives, that
they can hardly be recognised as belonging to the same species.
In those lands the traveller finds that there is none of the
wonderful variety which so distinguishes the Dog of Europe. There
he will never see the bluff, sturdy, surly, faithful mastiff, the
slight gazelle-like greyhound, the sharp, intelligent terrier, the
silent, courageous bulldog, the deep-voiced, tawny bloodhound, the
noble Newfoundland, the clever, vivacious poodle, or the gentle,
silken-haired spaniel.
As he traverses the streets, he finds that all the dogs are alike,
and that all are gaunt, hungry, half starved, savage, and cowardly,
more like wolves than dogs, and quite as ready as wolves to attack
when they fancy they can do so with safety. They prowl about the
streets in great numbers, living, as they best can, on any scraps of
food that they may happen to find. They have no particular masters,
and no particular homes. Charitable persons will sometimes feed
them, but will never make companions of them, feeling that the very
contact of a dog would be a pollution. They are certainly useful
animals, because they act as scavengers, and will eat almost any
animal substance that comes in their way.
The strangest part of their character is the organization which
prevails among them. By some extraordinary means they divide the
town into districts, and not one dog ever ventures out of that
particular district to which it is attached. The boundaries,
although invisible, are as effectual as the loftiest walls, and not
even the daintiest morsel will tempt a dog to pass the mysterious
line which forms the boundary of his district. Generally, these
bands of dogs are so savage that any one who is obliged to walk in a
district where the dogs do not know him is forced to carry a stout
stick for his protection. Like their European relatives, they have
great dislike towards persons who are dressed after a fashion to
which they are unaccustomed, and therefore are sure to harass any
one who comes from Europe and wears the costume of his own country.
As is customary among animals which unite themselves in troops, each
band is under the command of a single leader, whose position is
recognised and his authority acknowledged by all the members.
[Illustration: DOGS IN AN EASTERN CITY AT NIGHT.]
These peculiarities are to be seen almost exclusively in the
dogs which run wild about the towns, because there is abundant
evidence in the Scriptures that the animal was used in a partially
domesticated state, certainly for the protection of their herds,
and possibly for the guardianship of their houses. That the Dog was
employed for the first of these purposes is shown in Job xxx. i:
"But now they that are younger than I have me in derision, whose
fathers I would have disdained to have set with the dogs of my
flock." And that the animal was used for the protection of houses is
thought by some commentators to be shown by the well-known passage
in Is. lvi. 10: "His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they
are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving
to slumber." Still, it is very probable that in this passage the
reference is not made to houses, but to the flocks and herds which
these watchmen ought to have guarded.
The rooted dislike and contempt felt by the Israelites towards
the Dog is seen in numerous passages. Even in that sentence from
Job which has just been quoted, wherein the writer passionately
deplores the low condition into which he has fallen, and contrasts
it with his former high estate, he complains that he is despised by
those whose fathers he held even in less esteem than the dogs which
guarded his herds. There are several references to the Dog in the
books of Samuel, in all of which the name of the animal is mentioned
contemptuously. For example, when David accepted the challenge of
Goliath, and went to meet his gigantic enemy without the ordinary
protection of mail, and armed only with a sling and his shepherd's
staff Goliath said to him, "Am I a dog, that thou comest to me with
staves?" (1 Sam. xvii. 43.) And in the same book, chapter xxiv. 14,
David remonstrates with Saul for pursuing so insignificant a person
as himself, and said, "After whom is the King of Israel come out?
after a dead dog, after a flea."
[Illustration: SHIMEI EXULTING OVER KING DAVID.]
The same metaphor is recorded in the second book of the same writer.
Once it was employed by Mephibosheth, the lame son of Jonathan, when
extolling the generosity of David, then King of Israel in the place
of his grandfather Saul: "And he bowed himself, and said, 'What
is thy servant, that thou shouldest look upon such a dead dog as
I am?'" (2 Sam. ix. 8.) In the same book, chapter xvi. 9, Abishai
applies this contemptuous epithet to Shimei, who was exulting over
the troubled monarch with all the insolence of a cowardly nature,
"Why should this dead dog curse my lord the king?" Abner also makes
use of a similar expression, "Am I a dog's head?" And we may also
refer to the familiar passage in 2 Kings viii. 13, Elisha had
prophesied to Hazael that he would become king on the death of
Ben-hadad, and that he would work terrible mischief in the land.
Horrified at these predictions, or at all events pretending to be
so, he replied, "But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do
this great thing?"
If we turn from the Old to the New Testament, we find the same
contemptuous feeling displayed towards the Dog. It is mentioned as
an intolerable aggravation of the sufferings endured by Lazarus the
beggar as he lay at the rich man's gate, that the dogs came and
licked his sores. In several passages, the word Dog is employed as
a metaphor for scoffers, or unclean persons, or sometimes for those
who did not belong to the Church, whether Jewish or Christian. In
the Sermon on the Mount our Lord himself uses this image, "Give not
that which is holy unto dogs" (Matt. vii. 6.) In the same book,
chapter xv. 26, Jesus employs the same metaphor when speaking to
the Canaanitish woman who had come to ask him to heal her daughter:
"It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to dogs."
And that she understood the meaning of the words is evident from
her answer, in which faith and humility are so admirably blended.
Both St. Paul and St. John employ the word Dog in the same sense.
In his epistle to the Philippians, chapter iii. 2, St. Paul writes,
"Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers." And in the Revelation,
chapter xxii. 14, these words occur: "Blessed are they that do his
commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may
enter in through the gates to the city; for without are dogs, and
sorcerers, ... and murderers, and idolaters, and whomsoever loveth
and maketh a lie."
That the dogs of ancient times formed themselves into bands just as
they do at present is evident from many passages of Scripture, among
which may be mentioned those sentences from the Psalms, wherein
David is comparing the assaults of his enemies to the attacks of the
dogs which infested the city. "Thou hast brought me into the dust
of death; for dogs have compassed me, the assembly of the wicked
have enclosed me." This passage will be better appreciated when
the reader has perused the following extract from a recent work
by Signor Pierotti. After giving a general account of the Dogs of
Palestine and their customs, he proceeds as follows:--
"In Jerusalem, and in the other towns, the dogs have an organization
of their own. They are divided into families and districts,
especially in the night time, and no one of them ventures to quit
his proper quarter; for if he does, he is immediately attacked by
all the denizens of that into which he intrudes, and is driven
back, with several bites as a reminder. Therefore, when an European
is walking through Jerusalem by night, he is always followed by a
number of canine attendants, and greeted at every step with growls
and howls. These tokens of dislike, however, are not intended for
him, but for his followers, who are availing themselves of his
escort to pass unmolested from one quarter to another.
"During a very hard winter, I fed many of the dogs who frequented
the road which I traversed almost every evening, and afterwards,
each time that I passed, I received the homage not only of the
individuals, but of the whole band to which they belonged, for they
accompanied me to the limits of their respective jurisdictions and
were ready to follow me to my own house, if I did but give them a
sign of encouragement, coming at my beck from any distance. They
even recollected the signal two years afterwards, though it was but
little that I had given them."
The account which this experienced writer gives of the animal
presents a singular mixture of repulsive and pleasing traits,
the latter being attributable to the true nature of the Dog, and
the former to the utter neglect with which it is treated. He
remarks that the dogs which run wild in the cities of Palestine
are ill-favoured, ill-scented, and ill-conditioned beasts, more
like jackals or wolves than dogs, and covered with scars, which
betoken their quarrelsome nature. Yet, the same animals lose their
wild, savage disposition, as soon as any human being endeavours
to establish that relationship which was evidently intended to
exist between man and the dog. How readily even these despised and
neglected animals respond to the slightest advance, has been already
shown by Sig. Pierotti's experience, and there is no doubt that
these tawny, short-haired, wolf-like animals, could be trained as
perfectly as their more favoured brethren of the western world.
As in the olden times, so at the present day, the dogs lie about
in the streets, dependent for their livelihood upon the offal that
is flung into the roads, or upon the chance morsels that may be
thrown to them. An allusion to this custom is made in the well-known
passage in Matt. xv. The reader will remember the circumstance
that a woman of Canaan, and therefore not an Israelite, came to
Jesus, and begged him to heal her daughter, who was vexed with a
devil. Then, to try her faith, He said, "It is not meet to take the
children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." And she said, "Truth,
Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's
table." Now, the "crumbs" which are here mentioned are the broken
pieces of bread which were used at table, much as bread is sometimes
used in eating fish. The form of the "loaves" being flat, and much
like that of the oat-cake of this country, adapted them well to the
purpose. The same use of broken bread is alluded to in the parable
of Lazarus, who desired to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the
rich man's table, _i. e._ to partake of the same food as the dogs
which swarmed round him and licked his sores.
[Illustration: LAZARUS LYING AT THE RICH MAN'S DOOR.]
[Illustration: THE DEATH OF JEZEBEL.]
The "crumbs," however liberally distributed, would not nearly
suffice for the subsistence of the canine armies, and their chief
support consists of the offal, which is rather too plentifully
flung into the streets. If the body of any animal, not excluding
their own kind, be found lying in the streets, the dogs will
assemble round it, and tear it to pieces, and they have no scruples
even in devouring a human body. Of course, owing to the peculiar
feeling entertained by the Orientals towards the Dog, no fate can
be imagined more repulsive to the feelings of humanity than to be
eaten by dogs; and therein lies the terror of the fate which was
prophesied of Ahab and Jezebel. Moreover, the blood, even of the
lower animals, was held in great sanctity, and it was in those days
hardly possible to invoke a more dreadful fate upon any one than
that his blood should be lapped by dogs.
We lose much of the real force of the Scriptures, if we do not
possess some notion of the manners and customs of Palestine and the
neighbouring countries, as well as of the tone of mind prevalent
among the inhabitants. In our own country, that any one should be
eaten by dogs would be a fate so contrary to usage, that we can
hardly conceive its possibility, and such a fate would be out of
the ordinary course of events. But, if such a fate should happen to
befall any one, we should have no stronger feeling of pity than the
natural regret that the dead person was not buried with Christian
rites.
But, with the inhabitants of Palestine, such an event was by no
means unlikely. It was, and is still, the custom to bury the corpse
almost as soon as life has departed, and such would ordinarily have
been the case with the dead body of Jezebel. But, through fear of
the merciless Jehu, by whose command she had been flung from the
window of her own palace, no one dared to remove her mangled body.
The dogs, therefore, seized upon their prey; and, even before Jehu
had risen from the banquet with which he celebrated his deed,
nothing was left of the body but the skull, the feet, and the hands.
[Illustration: SYRIAN DOG.]
In Mr. Tristram's work, the author has recognised the true dog
nature, though concealed behind an uninviting form: "Our watch-dog,
Beirût, attached himself instinctively to Wilhelm, though his canine
instinct soon taught him to recognise every one of our party of
fourteen, and to cling to the tents, whether in motion or at rest,
as his home. Poor Beirût! though the veriest pariah in appearance,
thy plebeian form encased as noble a dog-heart as ever beat at the
sound of a stealthy step."
The same author records a very remarkable example of the sagacity of
the native Dog, and the fidelity with which it will keep guard over
the property of its master. "The guard-house provided us, unasked,
with an invaluable and vigilant sentry, who was never relieved, nor
ever quitted the post of duty. The poor Turkish conscript, like
every other soldier in the world, is fond of pets, and in front of
the grim turret that served for a guard-house was a collection of
old orange-boxes and crates, thickly peopled with a garrison of
dogs of low degree, whose attachment to the spot was certainly not
purchased by the loaves and fishes which fell to their lot.
"One of the family must indeed have had hard times, for she had a
family of no less than five dependent on her exertions, and on the
superfluities of the sentries' mess. With a sagacity almost more
than canine, the poor gaunt creature had scarcely seen our tents
pitched before she came over with all her litter and deposited
them in front of our tent. At once she scanned the features of
every member of the encampment, and introduced herself to our
notice. During the week of our stay, she never quitted her post,
or attempted any depredation on our kitchen-tent, which might have
led to her banishment. Night and day she proved a faithful and
vigilant sentry, permitting no stranger, human or canine, European
or Oriental, to approach the tents without permission, but keeping
on the most familiar terms with ourselves and our servants.
"On the morning of our departure, no sooner had she seen our camp
struck, than she conveyed her puppies back to their old quarters
in the orange-box, and no entreaties or bribes could induce her to
accompany us. On three subsequent visits to Jerusalem, the same
dog acted in a similar way, though no longer embarrassed by family
cares, and would on no account permit any strange dog, nor even her
companions at the guard-house, to approach within the tent ropes."
After perusing this account of the Dog of Palestine, two points
strike the reader. The first is the manner in which the Dog, in
spite of all the social disadvantages under which it labours,
displays one of the chief characteristics of canine nature, namely,
the yearning after human society. The animal in question had already
attached herself to the guard-house, where she could meet with some
sort of human converse, though the inborn prejudices of the Moslem
would prevent the soldiers from inviting her to associate with them,
as would certainly have been done by European soldiers. She nestled
undisturbed in the orange-box, and, safe under the protection of the
guard, brought up her young family in their immediate neighbourhood.
But, as soon as Europeans arrived, her instinct told her that they
would be closer associates than the Turkish soldiers who were
quartered in the guard-house, and accordingly she removed herself
and her family to the shelter of their tents.
Herein she carried out the leading principle of a dog's nature. A
dog _must_ have a master, or at all events a mistress, and just in
proportion as he is free from human control, does he become less
dog-like and more wolf-like. In fact, familiar intercourse with
mankind is an essential part of a dog's true character, and the
animal seems to be so well aware of this fact, that he will always
contrive to find a master of some sort, and will endure a life of
cruel treatment at the hands of a brutal owner rather than have no
master at all.
The second point in this account is the singular local instinct
which characterises the Dogs of Palestine and other eastern
countries, and which is as much inbred in them as the faculty of
marking game in the pointer, the combative nature in the bulldog,
the exquisite scent in the bloodhound, and the love of water in
the Newfoundland dog. In this country, we fancy that the love of
locality belongs especially to the cat, and that the Dog cares
little for place, and much for man. But, in this case, we find that
the local instinct overpowered the yearning for human society. Fond
as was this dog of her newly-found friends, and faithful as she was
in her self-imposed service, she would not follow them away from the
spot where she had been born, and where she had produced her own
young.
This curious love for locality has evidently been derived from the
traditional custom of successive generations, which has passed from
the realm of reason into that of instinct. The reader will remember
that Sig. Pierotti mentions an instance where the dogs which he had
been accustomed to feed would follow him as far as the limits of
their particular district, but would go no farther. The late Albert
Smith, in his "Month at Constantinople," gives a similar example of
this characteristic. He first describes the general habits of the
dogs.
On the first night of his arrival, he could not sleep, and went
to the window to look out in the night. "The noise I heard then I
shall never forget. To say that if all the sheep-dogs, in going to
Smithfield on a market-day, had been kept on the constant bark,
and pitted against the yelping curs upon all the carts in London,
they could have given any idea of the canine uproar that now first
astonished me, would be to make the feeblest of images. The whole
city rang with one vast riot. Down below me, at Tophané--over-about
Stamboul--far away at Scutari--the whole sixty thousand dogs that
are said to overrun Constantinople appeared engaged in the most
active extermination of each other, without a moment's cessation.
The yelping, howling, barking, growling, and snarling, were all
merged into one uniform and continuous even sound, as the noise of
frogs becomes when heard at a distance. For hours there was no lull.
I went to sleep, and woke again, and still, with my windows open,
I heard the same tumult going on; nor was it until daybreak that
anything like tranquillity was restored.
"Going out in the daytime, it is not difficult to find traces of the
fights of the night about the limbs of all the street dogs. There
is not one, among their vast number, in the possession of a perfect
skin. Some have their ears gnawed away or pulled off; others have
their eyes taken out; from the backs and haunches of others perfect
steaks of flesh had been torn away; and all bear the scars of
desperate combats.
"Wild and desperate as is their nature, these poor animals are
susceptible of kindness. If a scrap of bread is thrown to one of
them now and then, he does not forget it; for they have, at times,
a hard matter to live--not the dogs amongst the shops of Galata or
Stamboul, but those whose 'parish' lies in the large burying-grounds
and desert places without the city; for each keeps, or rather is
kept, to his district, and if he chanced to venture into a strange
one, the odds against his return would be very large. One battered
old animal, to whom I used occasionally to toss a scrap of food,
always followed me from the hotel to the cross street in Pera,
where the two soldiers stood on guard, but would never come beyond
this point. He knew the fate that awaited him had he done so; and
therefore, when I left him, he would lie down in the road, and go to
sleep until I came back.
"When a horse or camel dies, and is left about the roads near the
city, the bones are soon picked very clean by these dogs, and they
will carry the skulls or pelves to great distances. I was told that
they will eat their dead fellows--a curious fact, I believe, in
canine economy. They are always troublesome, not to say dangerous,
at night; and are especially irritated by Europeans, whom they will
single out amongst a crowd of Levantines."
In the same work there is a short description of a solitary dervish,
who had made his home in the hollow of a large plane-tree, in front
of which he sat, surrounded by a small fence of stakes only a foot
or so in height. Around him, but not venturing within the fence,
were a number of gaunt, half-starved dogs, who prowled about him
in hopes of having an occasional morsel of food thrown to them.
Solitary as he was, and scanty as must have been the nourishment
which he could afford to them, the innate trustfulness of the
dog-nature induced them to attach themselves to human society of
some sort, though their master was one, and they were many--he was
poor, and they were hungry.
[Illustration: EASTERN WATER-SELLER.]
THE WOLF.
Identity of the animal indisputable--its numbers, past and
present--The Wolf never mentioned directly--its general
habits--References in Scripture--its mingled ferocity and
cowardice--its association into packs--The Wolf's bite--How it
takes its prey--its ravages among the flocks--Allusions to this
habit--The shepherd and his nightly enemies--Mr. Tristram and
the Wolf--A semi-tamed Wolf at Marsaba.
There is no doubt that the Hebrew word _Zeëb_, which occurs in a
few passages of the Old Testament, is rightly translated as WOLF,
and signifies the same animal as is frequently mentioned in the New
Testament.
This fierce and dangerous animal was formerly very plentiful in
Palestine, but is now much less common, owing to the same causes
which have extirpated the lion from the country. It is a rather
remarkable fact, that in no passage of Holy Writ is the Wolf
directly mentioned. Its name is used as a symbol of a fierce and
treacherous enemy, but neither in the Old nor New Testament does
any sacred writer mention any act as performed by the Wolf. We have
already heard of the lion which attacked Samson and was killed by
him, of the lion which slew the disobedient prophet, and of the
lions which spared Daniel when thrown into their den. We also read
of the dogs which licked Ahab's blood, and ate the body of Jezebel,
also of the bears which tore the mocking children.
But in no case is the Wolf mentioned, except in a metaphorical
sense; and this fact is the more remarkable, because the animals
were so numerous that they were very likely to have exercised some
influence on a history extending over such a lengthened range of
years, and limited to so small a portion of the earth. Yet we never
hear of the Wolf attacking any of the personages mentioned in
Scripture; and although we are told of the exploit of David, who
pursued a lion and a bear that had taken a lamb out of his fold, we
are never told of any similar deed in connexion with the Wolf.
[Illustration: WOLVES ATTACKING A FLOCK OF SHEEP.]
This animal was then what it is now. Seldom seen by day, it lies
hidden in its covert as long as the light lasts, and steals out in
search of prey in the evening. This custom of the Wolf is mentioned
in several passages of Holy Scripture, such as that in Jer. v. 5,
6: "These have altogether broken the yoke, and burst the bonds.
Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of
the evenings shall spoil them." In this passage the reader will
see that the rebellious Israelites are compared to restive draught
cattle which have broken away from their harness and run loose,
so that they are deprived of the protection of their owners, and
exposed to the fury of wild beasts. A similar reference is made in
Hab. i. 8: "Their horses also are swifter than the leopards, and are
more fierce than the evening wolves." The same habit of the Wolf is
alluded to in Zeph. iii. 3: "Her princes within her are roaring
lions; her judges are evening wolves."
Individually, the Wolf is rather a timid animal. It will avoid a man
rather than meet him. It prefers to steal upon its prey and take
it unawares, rather than to seize it openly and boldly. It is ever
suspicious of treachery, and is always imagining that a trap is laid
for it. Even the shallow device of a few yards of rope trailing
from any object, or a strip of cloth fluttering in the breeze, is
quite sufficient to keep the Wolf at bay for a considerable time.
This fact is well known to hunters, who are accustomed to secure the
body of a slain deer by simply tying a strip of cloth to its horn.
If taken in a trap of any kind, or even if it fancies itself in an
enclosure from which it can find no egress, it loses all courage,
and will submit to be killed without offering the least resistance.
It will occasionally endeavour to effect its escape by feigning
death, and has more than once been known to succeed in this device.
But, collectively, the Wolf is one of the most dangerous animals
that can be found. Herding together in droves when pressed by
hunger, the wolves will openly hunt prey, performing this task as
perfectly as a pack of trained hounds. Full of wiles themselves,
they are craftily wise in anticipating the wiles of the animals
which they pursue; and even in full chase, while the body of the
pack is following on the footsteps of the flying animal, one or two
are detached on the flanks, so as to cut it off if it should attempt
to escape by doubling on its pursuers.
There is no animal which a herd of wolves will not attack, and very
few which they will not ultimately secure. Strength avails nothing
against the numbers of these savage foes, which give no moment of
rest, but incessantly assail their antagonist, dashing by instinct
at those parts of the body which can be least protected, and
lacerating with their peculiar short, snapping bite. Should several
of their number be killed or disabled, it makes no difference to
the wolves, except that a minute or two are wasted in devouring
their slain or wounded brethren, and they only return to the attack
the more excited by the taste of blood. Swiftness of foot avails
nothing against the tireless perseverance of the wolves, who press
on in their peculiar, long, slinging gallop, and in the end are sure
to tire out the swifter footed but less enduring animal that flees
before them. The stately buffalo is conquered by the ceaseless
assaults of the wolves; the bear has been forced to succumb to them,
and the fleet-footed stag finds his swift limbs powerless to escape
the pursuing band, and his branching horns unable to resist their
furious onset when once they overtake him.
[Illustration: WOLVES CHASING DEER.]
That the Wolf is a special enemy to the sheep-fold is shown in
many parts of the Scriptures, both in the Old and New Testaments,
especially in the latter. In John x. 1-16, Jesus compares himself
to a good shepherd, who watches over the fold, and, if the wolves
should come to take the sheep, would rather give up His life than
they should succeed. But the false teachers are compared to bad
shepherds, hired for money, but having no interest in the sheep, and
who therefore will not expose themselves to danger in defence of
their charge.
This metaphor was far more effective in Palestine, and at that time,
than it is in this country and at the present day. In this land,
the shepherd has no anxiety about the inroads of wild beasts, but
in Palestine one of his chief cares was to keep watch at night lest
the wolves should attack the fold, and to drive them away himself in
case they should do so. Therefore the shepherd's life was one which
involved no small danger as well as anxiety, and the metaphor used
by our Lord gains additional force from the knowledge of this fact.
[Illustration: THE WOLF.]
A similar metaphor is used when Jesus wished to express in
forcible terms the dangers to which the chosen seventy would oft
be subjected, and the impossibility that they should be able to
overcome the many perils with which they would be surrounded. "Go
your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves" (Luke x.
3).
Mr. Tristram several times met wolves while he was engaged in his
travels, and mostly saw solitary specimens. One such encounter
took place in the wilderness of Judah: "On my way back, I met a
fine solitary wolf, who watched me very coolly, at the distance of
sixty yards, while I drew my charge and dropped a bullet down the
barrel. Though I sent the ball into a rock between his legs as he
stood looking at me in the wady, he was not sufficiently alarmed to
do more than move on a little more quickly, ever and anon turning
to look at me, while gradually increasing his distance. Darkness
compelled me to desist from the chase, when he quietly turned and
followed me at a respectful distance. He was a magnificent animal,
larger than any European wolf, and of a much lighter colour."
Those who are acquainted with the character of the animal will
appreciate the truthfulness of this description. The cautious
prowl at a distance, the slow trot away when he fancied he might
be attacked, the reverted look, and the final turning back and
following at a respectful distance, are all characteristic traits of
the Wolf, no matter to what species it may belong, nor what country
it may inhabit.
On another occasion, while riding in the open plain of Gennesaret,
the horse leaped over the bank of a little ditch, barely three feet
in depth. After the horse had passed, and not until then, a Wolf
started out of the ditch, literally from under the horses hoofs,
and ran off. The animal had been crouching under the little bank,
evidently watching for some cows and calves which were grazing at
a short distance, under the charge of a Bedouin boy. The same
author mentions that one of the monks belonging to the monastery at
Marsaba had contrived to render a Wolf almost tame. Every evening at
six o'clock the Wolf came regularly across the ravine, ate a piece
of bread, and then went back again. With the peculiar jealousy of
all tamed animals, the Wolf would not suffer any of his companions
to partake of his good fortune. Several of them would sometimes
accompany him, but as soon as they came under the wall of the
monastery he always drove them away.
[Illustration: WOLVES ATTACKING WILD GOATS.]
The inhabitants of Palestine say that the Wolves of that country
hunt singly, or at most in little packs of few in number. Still they
dread the animal exceedingly on account of the damage it inflicts
upon their flocks of sheep and goats.
[Illustration: THE JACKAL.]
THE FOX OR JACKAL.
The two animals comprehended under one name--The Jackal--its
numbers in ancient and modern Palestine--General habits of the
Jackal--Localities where the Jackal is found--Samson, and the
three hundred "foxes"--Popular objections to the narrative--The
required number easily obtained--Signor Pierotti's remarks upon
the Jackal--An unpleasant position--How the fields were set on
fire--The dread of fire inherent in wild beasts--The truth of
the narrative proved--The Fox and Jackal destructive among grapes
There are several passages in the Old Testament in which the word
Fox occurs, and it is almost certain that the Hebrew word _Shuâl_,
which is rendered in our translation as Fox, is used rather loosely,
and refers in some places to the Jackal, and in others to the Fox.
We will first take those passages in which the former rendering of
the word is evidently the right one, and will begin by examining
those characteristics of the animal which afford grounds for such an
assertion.
[Illustration: FOXES OR JACKALS DEVOURING THE CARCASE OF A GOAT.]
Even at the present time, the Jackal is extremely plentiful in
Palestine; and as the numbers of wild beasts have much decreased
in modern days, the animals must have been even more numerous than
they are at present. It is an essentially nocturnal and gregarious
animal. During the whole of the day the Jackals lie concealed in
their holes or hiding-places, which are usually cavities in the
rocks, in tombs, or among ruins. At nightfall they issue from their
dens, and form themselves into packs, often consisting of several
hundred individuals, and prowl about in search of food. Carrion of
various kinds forms their chief subsistence, and they perform in
the country much the same task as is fulfilled by the dogs in the
cities.
If any animal should be killed, or even severely wounded, the
Jackals are sure to find it out and to devour it before the
daybreak. They will scent out the track of the hunter, and feed
upon the offal of the beasts which he has slain. If the body of
a human being were to be left on the ground, the Jackals would
certainly leave but little traces of it; and in the olden times of
warfare, they must have held high revelry in the battle-field after
the armies had retired. It is to this propensity of the Jackal
that David refers--himself a man of war, who had fought on many a
battle-field, and must have seen the carcases of the slain mangled
by these nocturnal prowlers: "Those that seek my soul, to destroy
it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth. They shall fall
by the sword; they shall be a portion for foxes" (Ps. lxiii. 9,
10). Being wild beasts, afraid of man, and too cowardly to attack
him even when rendered furious by hunger, and powerful by force of
numbers, they keep aloof from towns and cities, and live in the
uninhabited parts of the country. Therefore the prophet Jeremiah, in
his Book of Lamentations, makes use of the following forcible image,
when deploring the pitiful state into which Judæa had fallen: "For
this our heart is faint; for these things our eyes are dim: because
of the mountain of Zion, which is desolate, the foxes walk upon it"
(Lam. v. 17). And Ezekiel makes use of a similar image: "O Israel,
thy prophets are like foxes in the desert."
But, by far the most important passage in which the Fox is
mentioned, is that wherein is recorded the grotesque vengeance of
Samson upon the Philistines: "And Samson went and caught three
hundred foxes, and took firebrands, and turned tail to tail, and
put a firebrand in the midst between two tails. And when he had set
the brands on fire, he let them go into the standing com of the
Philistines, and burnt up both the shocks and also the standing
corn, with the vineyards and olives" (Judges xv. 4, 5). Now, as this
is one of the passages of Holy Writ to which great objections have
been taken, it will be as well to examine these objections, and see
whether they have any real force. The first of these objections is,
that the number of foxes is far too great to have been caught at
one time, and to this objection two answers have been given. The
first answer is, that they need not have been caught at once, but
by degrees, and kept until wanted. But the general tenor of the
narrative is undoubtedly in favour of the supposition that this act
of Samson was unpremeditated, and that it was carried into operation
at once, before his anger had cooled. The second answer is, that
the requisite number of Foxes might have been miraculously sent to
Samson for this special purpose. This theory is really so foolish
and utterly untenable, that I only mention it because it has been
put forward. It fails on two grounds: the first being that a miracle
would hardly have been wrought to enable Samson to revenge himself
in so cruel and unjustifiable a manner; and the second, that there
was not the least necessity for any miracle at all.
[Illustration: A FEAST IN PROSPECT.]
If we put out of our minds the idea of the English Fox, an animal
comparatively scarce in this country, and solitary in its habits,
and substitute the extremely plentiful and gregarious Jackal,
wandering in troops by night, and easily decoyed by hunger into a
trap, we shall see that double the number might have been taken,
if needful. Moreover, it is not to be imagined that Samson caught
them all with his own hand. He was at the head of his people, and
had many subordinates at his command, so that a large number of
hunters might have been employed simultaneously in the capture. In
corroboration of this point, I insert an extremely valuable extract
from Signor Pierotti's work, in which he makes reference to this
very portion of the sacred history:--
"It is still very abundant near Gaza, Askalon, Ashdod, Ekron, and
Ramleh. I have frequently met with it during my wanderings by night,
and on one occasion had an excellent opportunity of appreciating
their number and their noise.
"One evening in the month of January, while it was raining a perfect
deluge, I was obliged, owing to the dangerous illness of a friend,
to return from Jerusalem to Jaffa. The depth of snow on the road
over a great part of the mountain, the clayey mud in the plain, and
the darkness of the night, prevented my advancing quickly; so that
about half-past three in the morning I arrived on the bank of a
small torrent, about half an hour's journey to the east of Ramleh. I
wished to cross: my horse at first refused, but, on my spurring it,
advanced and at once sank up to the breast, followed of course by
my legs, thus teaching me to respect the instinct of an Arab horse
for the future.
[Illustration: A FEAST SECURED.]
"There I stuck, without the possibility of escape, and consoled my
horse and myself with some provisions that I had in my saddle-bags,
shouting and singing at intervals, in the hope of obtaining succour,
and of preventing accidents, as I knew that the year before a mule
in the same position had been mistaken for a wild beast, and killed.
The darkness was profound, and the wind very high; but, happily,
it was not cold; for the only things attracted by my calls were
numbers of jackals, who remained at a certain distance from me, and
responded to my cries, especially when I tried to imitate them, as
though they took me for their music-master.
"About five o'clock, one of the guards of the English consulate at
Jerusalem came from Ramleh and discovered my state. He charitably
returned thither, and brought some men, who extricated me and my
horse from our unpleasant bath, which, as may be supposed, was not
beneficial to our legs.
"During this most uncomfortable night, I had good opportunity of
ascertaining that, if another Samson had wished to burn again the
crops in the country of the Philistines, he would have had no
difficulty in finding more than three hundred jackals, and catching
as many as he wanted in springs, traps, or pitfalls. (See Ps. cxl.
5.)"
The reader will now see that there was not the least difficulty in
procuring the requisite number of animals, and that consequently the
first objection to the truth of the story is disposed of.
We will now proceed to the second objection, which is, that if
the animals were tied tail to tail, they would remain on or near
the same spot, because they would pull in different directions,
and that, rather than run about, they would turn round and fight
each other. Now, in the first place, we are nowhere told that the
tails of the foxes, or jackals, were placed in contact with each
other, and it is probable that some little space was left between
them. That animals so tied would not run in a straight line is
evident enough, and this was exactly the effect which Samson
wished to produce. Had they been at liberty, and the fiery brand
fastened to their tails, they would have run straight to their
dens, and produced but little effect. But their captor, with
cruel ingenuity, had foreseen this contingency, and, by the method
of securing them which he adopted, forced them to pursue a devious
course, each animal trying to escape from the dreaded firebrand, and
struggling in vain endeavours to drag its companion towards its own
particular den.
[Illustration: A TRESPASSER.]
All wild animals have an instinctive dread of fire; and there is
none, not even the fierce and courageous lion, that dares enter
within the glare of the bivouac fire. A lion has even been struck
in the face with a burning brand, and has not ventured to attack
the man that wielded so dreadful a weapon. Consequently it may be
imagined that the unfortunate animals that were used by Samson for
his vindictive purpose, must have been filled with terror at the
burning brands which they dragged after them, and the blaze of
the fire which was kindled wherever they went. They would have no
leisure to fight, and would only think of escaping from the dread
and unintelligible enemy which pursued them.
When a prairie takes fire, all the wild inhabitants flee in terror,
and never think of attacking each other, so that the bear, the wolf,
the cougar, the deer, and the wild swine, may all be seen huddled
together, their natural antagonism quelled in the presence of a
common foe. So it must have been with the miserable animals which
were made the unconscious instruments of destruction. That they
would stand still when a burning brand was between them, and when
flames sprang up around them, is absurd. That they would pull in
exactly opposite directions with precisely balanced force is equally
improbable, and it is therefore evident that they would pursue a
devious path, the stronger of the two dragging the weaker, but being
jerked out of a straight course and impeded by the resistance which
it would offer. That they would stand on the same spot and fight has
been shown to be contrary to the custom of animals under similar
circumstances.
Thus it will be seen that every objection not only falls to the
ground, but carries its own refutation, thus vindicating this
episode in sacred history, and showing, that not only were the
circumstances possible, but that they were highly probable. Of
course every one of the wretched animals must have been ultimately
burned to death, after suffering a prolonged torture from the
firebrand that was attached to it. Such a consideration would,
however, have had no effect for deterring Samson from employing
them. The Orientals are never sparing of pain, even when inflicted
upon human beings, and in too many cases they seem utterly unable
even to comprehend the cruelty of which they are guilty. And Samson
was by no means a favourable specimen of his countrymen. He was the
very incarnation of strength, but was as morally weak as he was
corporeally powerful; and to that weakness he owed his fall. Neither
does he seem to possess the least trace of forbearance any more than
of self-control, but he yields to his own undisciplined nature,
places himself, and through him the whole Israelitish nation, in
jeopardy, and then, with a grim humour, scatters destruction on
every side in revenge for the troubles which he has brought upon
himself by his own acts.
THE HYÆNA.
The Hyæna not mentioned by name, but evidently alluded
to--Signification of the word Zabua--Translated in the
Septuagint as Hyæna--A scene described by the prophet
Isaiah--The Hyæna plentiful in Palestine at the present
day--its well-known cowardice and fear of man--The uses of
the Hyæna and the services which it renders--The particular
species of Hyæna--The Hyæna in the burial-grounds--Hunting the
Hyæna--Curious superstition respecting the talismanic properties
of its skin--Precautions adopted in flaying it--Popular legends
of the Hyæna and its magical powers--The cavern home of the
Hyæna--The valley of Zeboim.
Although in our version of the Scriptures the Hyæna is not mentioned
by that name, there are two passages in the Old Testament which
evidently refer to that animal, and therefore it is described in
these pages. If the reader will refer to the prophet Jeremiah, xii.
7-9, he will find these words: "I have forsaken mine house, I have
left mine heritage; I have given the dearly beloved of my soul into
the hand of her enemies. Mine heritage is unto me as a lion in
the forest; it crieth out against me: therefore have I hated it.
Mine heritage is unto me as a speckled bird; the birds round about
are against her: come ye, assemble all the beasts of the field,
come to devour." Now, the word _zabua_ signifies something that
is streaked, and in the Authorized Version it is rendered as a
speckled bird. But in the Septuagint it is rendered as Hyæna, and
this translation is thought by many critical writers to be the true
one. It is certain that the word _zabua_ is one of the four names by
which the Talmudical writers mention the Hyæna, when treating of its
character; and it is equally certain that such a rendering makes the
passage more forcible, and is in perfect accordance with the habits
of predacious animals.
The whole scene which the Prophet thus describes was evidently
familiar to him. First, we have the image of a deserted country,
allowed to be overrun with wild beasts. Then we have the lion,
which has struck down its prey, roaring with exultation, and
defying any adversary to take it from him. Then, the lion having
eaten his fill and gone away, we have the Hyænas, vultures, and
other carrion-eating creatures, assembling around the carcase, and
hastening to devour it. This is a scene which has been witnessed
by many hunters who have pursued their sport in lands where lions,
hyænas, and vultures are found; and all these creatures were
inhabitants of Palestine at the time when Jeremiah wrote.
At the present day, the Hyæna is still plentiful in Palestine,
though in the course of the last few years its numbers have sensibly
diminished. The solitary traveller, when passing by night from one
town to another, often falls in with the Hyæna, but need suffer no
fear, as it will not attack a human being, and prefers to slink out
of his way. But dead, and dying, or wounded animals are the objects
for which it searches; and when it finds them, it devours the whole
of its prey. The lion will strike down an antelope, an ox, or a
goat--will tear off its flesh with its long fangs, and lick the
bones with its rough tongue until they are quite cleaned. The wolves
and jackals will follow the lion, and eat every soft portion of the
dead animal, while the vultures will fight with them for the coveted
morsels. But the Hyæna is a more accomplished scavenger than lion,
wolf, jackal, or vulture; for it will eat the very bones themselves,
its tremendously-powerful jaws and firmly-set teeth enabling it to
crush even the leg-bone of an ox, and its unparalleled digestive
powers enabling it to assimilate the sharp and hard fragments which
would kill any creature not constituted like itself.
In a wild, or even a partially-inhabited country, the Hyæna is,
therefore, a most useful animal. It may occasionally kill a crippled
or weakly ox, and sometimes carry off a sheep; but, even in that
case, no very great harm is done, for it does not meddle with any
animal that can resist. But these few delinquencies are more than
compensated by the great services which it renders as scavenger,
consuming those substances which even the lion cannot eat, and thus
acting as a scavenger in removing objects which would be offensive
to sight and injurious to health.
[Illustration: LEOPARD ROBBED OF ITS PREY BY HYÆNAS.]
The species which is mentioned in the Scriptures is the Striped
Hyæna (_Hyæna striata_); but the habits of all the species are
almost exactly similar. We are told by travellers of certain towns
in different parts of Africa which would be unendurable but for the
Hyænas. With the disregard for human life which prevails throughout
all savage portions of that country, the rulers of these towns order
executions almost daily, the bodies of the victims being allowed
to lie where they happened to fall. No one chooses to touch them,
lest they should also be added to the list of victims, and the
decomposing bodies would soon cause a pestilence but for the Hyænas,
who assemble at night round the bodies, and by the next morning have
left scarcely a trace of the murdered men.
Even in Palestine, and in the present day, the Hyæna will endeavour
to rifle the grave, and to drag out the interred corpse. The bodies
of the rich are buried in rocky caves, whose entrances are closed
with heavy stones, which the Hyæna cannot move; but those of the
poor, which are buried in the ground, must be defended by stones
heaped over them. Even when this precaution is taken, the Hyæna will
sometimes find out a weak spot, drag out the body, and devour it.
In consequence of this propensity, the inhabitants have an utter
detestation of the animal. They catch it whenever they can, in
pitfalls or snares, using precisely the same means as were employed
two thousand years ago; or they hunt it to its den, and then kill
it, stripping off the hide, and carrying it about still wet,
receiving a small sum of money from those to whom they show it.
Afterwards the skin is dressed, by rubbing it with lime and salt,
and steeping it in the waters of the Dead Sea. It is then made into
sandals and leggings, which are thought to be powerful charms, and
to defend the wearer from the Hyæna's bite.
They always observe certain superstitious precautions in flaying the
dead animal. Believing that the scent of the flesh would corrupt the
air, they invariably take the carcase to the leeward of the tents
before they strip off the skin. Even in the animal which has been
kept for years in a cage, and has eaten nothing but fresh meat,
the odour is too powerful to be agreeable, as I can testify from
practical experience when dissecting a Hyæna that had died in the
Zoological Gardens; and it is evident that the scent of an animal
that has lived all its life on carrion must be almost unbearable.
The skin being removed, the carcase is burnt, because the hunters
think that by this process the other Hyænas are prevented from
finding the body of their comrade, and either avenging its death or
taking warning by its fate.
[Illustration: HYÆNAS DEVOURING BONES.]
Superstitions seem to be singularly prevalent concerning the Hyæna.
In Palestine, there is a prevalent idea that if a Hyæna meets a
solitary man at night, it can enchant him in such a manner as to
make him follow it through thickets and over rocks, until he is
quite exhausted, and falls an unresisting prey; but that over two
persons he has no such influence, and therefore a solitary traveller
is gravely advised to call for help as soon as he sees a Hyæna,
because the fascination of the beast would be neutralized by the
presence of a second person. So firmly is this idea rooted in the
minds of the inhabitants, that they will never travel by night,
unless they can find at least one companion in their journey.
In Northern Africa there are many strange superstitions connected
with this animal, one of the most curious of which is founded on
its well-known cowardice. The Arabs fancy that any weapon which
has killed a Hyæna, whether it be gun, sword, spear, or dagger, is
thenceforth unfit to be used in warfare. "Throw away that sword,"
said an Arab to a French officer, who had killed a Hyæna, "it has
slain the Hyæna, and it will be treacherous to you."
At the present day, its numbers are not nearly so great in Palestine
as they used to be, and are decreasing annually. The cause of
this diminution lies, according to Signor Pierotti, more in the
destruction of forests than in the increase of population and the
use of fire-arms, though the two latter causes have undoubtedly
considerable influence.
There is a very interesting account by Mr. Tristram of the haunt of
these animals. While exploring the deserted quarries of Es Sumrah,
between Beth-arabah and Bethel, he came upon a wonderful mass of
hyænine relics. The quarries in which were lying the half-hewn
blocks, scored with the marks of wedges, had evidently formed the
resort of Hyænas for a long series of years. "Vast heaps of bones
of camels, oxen, and sheep had been collected by these animals, in
some places to the depth of two or three feet, and on one spot I
counted the skulls of seven camels. There were no traces whatever of
any human remains. We had here a beautiful recent illustration of
the mode of foundation of the old bone caverns, so valuable to the
geologist. These bones must all have been brought in by the Hyænas,
as no camel or sheep could possibly have entered the caverns alive,
nor could any floods have washed them in. Near the entrance where
the water percolates, they were already forming a soft breccia."
The second allusion to the Hyæna is made in 1 Sam. xiii. 18,
"Another company turned to the way of the border that looketh to the
Valley of Zeboim towards the wilderness," _i.e._ to the Valley of
Hyænas.
The colour of the Striped Hyæna varies according to its age. When
young, as is the case with many creatures, birds as well as mammals,
the stripes from which it derives its name are much more strongly
marked than in the adult specimen. The general hue of the fur is
a pale grey-brown, over which are drawn a number of dark stripes,
extending along the ribs and across the limbs.
In the young animal these stripes are nearly twice as dark and twice
as wide as in the adult, and they likewise appear on the face and
on other parts of the body, whence they afterwards vanish. The fur
is always rough; and along the spine, and especially over the neck
and shoulders, it is developed into a kind of mane, which gives a
very fierce aspect to the animal. The illustration shows a group of
Hyænas coming to feed on the relics of a dead animal. The jackals
and vultures have eaten as much of the flesh as they can manage,
and the vultures are sitting, gorged, round the stripped bones. The
Hyænas are now coming up to play their part as scavengers, and have
already begun to break up the bones in their crushing-mills of jaws.
THE WEASEL.
Difficulty of identifying the Weasel of Scripture--The Weasel of
Palestine--Suggested identity with the Ichneumon.
The word Weasel occurs once in the Holy Scriptures, and therefore it
is necessary that the animal should be mentioned. There is a great
controversy respecting the identification of the animal, inasmuch as
there is nothing in the context which gives the slightest indication
of its appearance or habits.
The passage in question is that which prohibits the Weasel and the
mouse as unclean animals (see Lev. xi. 29). Now the word which is
here translated Weasel is _Choled_, or _Chol'd_; and, I believe,
never occurs again in the whole of the Old Testament. Mr. W.
Houghton conjectures that the Hebrew word Choled is identical with
the Arabic _Chuld_ and the Syriac _Chuldo_, both words signifying a
mole; and therefore infers that the unclean animal in question is
not a Weasel, but a kind of mole.
The Weasel does exist in Palestine, and seems to be as plentiful
there as in our own country. Indeed, the whole tribe of Weasels
is well represented, and the polecat is seen there as well as the
Weasel.
There is hardly any animal which, for its size, is so much dreaded
by the creatures on which it preys as the common Weasel.
Although its small proportions render a single Weasel an
insignificant opponent to man or dog, yet it can wage a sharp battle
even with such powerful foes, and refuses to yield except at the
last necessity.
The proportions of the Weasel are extremely small, a full-grown male
not exceeding ten inches in length. The color of its fur is bright
reddish-brown on the upper parts of the body, and the under-portions
are pure white. The audacity and courage of this little animal are
really remarkable. It seems to hold every being except itself in the
most sovereign contempt, and, to all appearances, is as ready to
match itself against a man as against a mouse.
It is a terrible foe to many of the smaller animals, such as rats
and mice, and performs a really good service to the farmer in
destroying many of these farmyard pests. The Weasel is specially
dreaded by rats and mice, because there is no hole through which
they can pass that will not also admit the passage of their enemy;
and, as the Weasel is most persevering and determined in pursuit, it
seldom happens that rats or mice escape when their little foe has
set itself fairly on their track.
[Illustration: WEASELS.]
Not only does the Weasel pursue its prey through the windings of
the burrows, but it will even cross water in the chase. When it
has at last reached its victim, it leaps upon the devoted creature
and endeavours to fix its teeth in the back of the neck, where it
retains its deadly hold in spite of every struggle on the part of
the wounded animal. If the attack be rightly made and the animal a
small one, the Weasel can drive its teeth into the brain and cause
instantaneous death.
The Weasel is very fond of eggs, and young birds of all kinds. It
is said that an egg that has been broken by a Weasel, can always be
recognized, by the peculiar mode which the little creature employs
for the purpose.
Instead of breaking the egg to pieces or biting a large hole in the
shell, the Weasel contents itself with making quite a small aperture
at one end, through which it abstracts the liquid contents.
A curious example of the courage of the Weasel, is related by a
gentleman who while crossing a field at dusk, saw an owl pounce upon
some object on the ground, and carry it in the air.
In a short time the bird showed signs of distress, trying to free
itself from some annoying object by means of its talons, and
flapping about in a very bewildered manner.
Soon afterwards the owl fell dead to the earth; and when the
spectator of the aërial combat approached, a weasel ran away from
the dead body of the bird, itself being apparently uninjured. On
examination of the owl's body, it was found that the Weasel, which
had been marked out for the owl's repast, had in its turn become the
assailant, and had attacked the unprotected parts which lie beneath
the wings. A considerable wound had been made in that spot, and the
large blood-vessels torn through.
[Illustration: THE BITER BIT.]
[Illustration: scene]
THE BADGER.
Difficulty in identifying the _Tachash_ of Scripture--References
to "Badgers' skins"--The Dugong thought to be the
Badger--The Bedouin sandals--Nature of the materials for
the Tabernacle--Habits of the Badger--The species found in
Palestine--Uses of the Badgers' skins--Looseness of zoological
terms.
Until very lately, there was much difficulty in ascertaining whether
the word _Tachash_ has been rightly translated as Badger. It occurs
in several parts of the Scriptures, and almost invariably is used
in relation to a skin or fur of some sort. We will first examine
the passages in which the Badger is mentioned, and then proceed to
identify the animal.
Nearly all the references to the Badger occur in the book of Exodus,
and form part of the directions for constructing the Tabernacle and
its contents. The first notice of the word occurs in Exodus xxv. 5,
where the people of Israel are ordered to bring their offerings for
the sanctuary, among which offerings are gold, silver, and brass,
blue, purple, and scarlet, fine linen, goats' hair, rams' skins dyed
red, badgers' skins, and shittim wood--all these to be used in the
construction of the Tabernacle. Then a little farther on, in chapter
xxvi. 14, we find one of the special uses to which the badgers'
skins were to be put, namely, to make the outer covering or roof of
the tabernacle. Another use for the badgers' skins was to form an
outer covering for the ark, table of shewbread, and other furniture
of the Tabernacle, when the people were on the march.
In all these cases the badger-skin is used as a covering to defend a
building or costly furniture, but there is one example where it is
employed for a different purpose. This passage occurs in the book
of Ezekiel, chapter xvi. 10. The prophet is speaking of Jerusalem
under the image of a woman, and uses these words, "I anointed thee
with oil; I clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod thee
with badger's skin, and I girded thee about with fine linen, and I
covered thee with silk. I decked thee also with ornaments, and I put
bracelets upon thy hands, and a chain upon thy neck, and I put a
jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful
crown upon thine head."
So we have here the fact, that the same material which was used for
the covering of the Tabernacle, and of the sacred furniture, could
also be used for the manufacture of shoes. This passage is the more
valuable because of an inference which may be drawn from it. The
reader will see that the badger-skin, whatever it may have been,
must have been something of considerable value, and therefore, in
all probability, something of much rarity.
In the present instance, it is classed with the most luxurious
robes that were known in those days, and it is worthy of special
mention among the bracelet, earrings, necklace, and coronal with
which the symbolized city was adorned. If the reader will now refer
to the passage in which the children of Israel were commanded to
bring their offerings, he will see that in those cases also the
badger-skins were ranked with the costliest articles of apparel
that could be found, and had evidently been brought from Egypt, the
peculiar home of all the arts; together with the vast quantity of
gold and jewels which were used for the same sacred purpose.
Now we find that the badger-skins in question must possess three
qualities: they must be costly, they must be capable of forming a
defence against the weather, and they must be strong enough to be
employed in the manufacture of shoes. If we accept the word Tachash
as signifying a Badger, we shall find that these conditions have
been fulfilled.
But many commentators have thought that badger-skins could not
have been procured in sufficient numbers for the purpose, and have
therefore conjectured that some other animal must be signified by
the word Tachash.
A species of dugong (_Halicore hemprichii_) is the animal that has
been selected as the Badger of the Scriptures. It is one of the
marine mammalia, and always lives near the shore, where it can find
the various algæ on which it feeds. It is a gregarious animal,
and, as it frequently ascends rivers for some distance, it may be
captured in sufficient numbers to make both its flesh and skin
useful. Moreover, it is of considerable size, fourteen or fifteen
feet in length being its usual dimensions, so that a comparatively
small number of the skins would be required for the covering of the
Tabernacle.
That shoes can be made of it is evident from the fact that at the
present day shoes, or rather sandals, are made from its hide, and
are commonly used by the Bedouins. But the very qualities and
peculiarities which render it a fit material for the sandal of a
half-naked Bedouin Arab, who has to walk continually over hard, hot,
sandy, and rough ground, would surely make it unsuitable for the
delicate shoes worn by a woman of rank who spends her time in the
house, and the rest of whose clothing is of fine linen and silk,
embroidered with gold and jewels. In our own country, the hobnailed
shoes of the ploughman and the slight shoe of a lady are made of
very different materials, and it is reasonable to conjecture that
such was the case when the passage in question was written.
Then Dr. Robinson, who admits that the hide of the dugong could
hardly have been used as the material for a lady's shoe, thinks that
it would have answered very well for the roof of the Tabernacle,
because it was large, clumsy, and coarse. It seems strange that he
did not also perceive that the two latter qualities would completely
disqualify such skins for that service. Everything clumsy and
coarse was studiously prohibited, and nothing but the very best
was considered fit for the Tabernacle of the Lord. By special
revelation, Moses was instructed to procure, not merely the ordinary
timber of the country for the framework--not only the fabrics which
would keep out rain and wind--not simply the metals in common use,
from which to make the lamps and other furniture--not the ordinary
oils for supplying the lamps; but, on the contrary, the finest
linen, the most elaborate embroidery, the rarest woods, the purest
gold, the costliest gems, were demanded, and nothing common or
inferior was accepted. The commonest material that was permitted
was the long, soft fleece of rams' wool; but, even in that case,
the wool had to be dyed of the regal scarlet--a dye so rare and so
costly that none but the wealthiest rulers could use it. Even the
very oil that burned in the lamps must be the purest olive-oil,
prepared expressly for that purpose.
[Illustration: BADGERS.]
The very fact, therefore, that any article was plentiful and could
easily be obtained, would be a proof that such article was not
used for so sacred a purpose; while it is impossible that anything
coarse and clumsy could have been accepted for the construction
of that Tabernacle within which the Shekinah ever burned over the
Mercy-seat--over which the cloud rested by day, and the fire shone
by night, visible external proofs of the Divine glory within.
We therefore dismiss from our minds the possibility of accepting
any material for it which was not exceptionably valuable, and which
would be employed in the uses of ordinary life. The great object of
the minutely-elaborate directions which were given through Moses to
the Israelites was evidently to keep continually before their eyes
the great truth that they owed all to God, and that their costliest
offerings were but acknowledgments of their dependence.
We will now presume that the Tachash of the Pentateuch and Ezekiel
is really the animal which we know by the name of Badger. It exists
throughout the whole of the district traversed by the Israelites,
though it is not very plentiful, nor is it easily taken. Had such
been the case, its fur would not have been employed in the service
of the sanctuary.
It is nocturnal in its habits, and very seldom is seen during the
hours of daylight, so that it cannot be captured by chase. It is
not gregarious, so that it cannot be taken in great numbers, as is
the case with certain wild animals which have been thought to be
the Tachash of Scripture. It is not a careless animal, so that it
cannot be captured or killed without the exercise of considerable
ingenuity, and the expenditure of much time and trouble. It is one
of the burrowing animals, digging for itself a deep subterranean
home, and always ready whenever it is alarmed to escape into
the dark recesses of its dwelling, from which it can scarcely be
dislodged. It is not a large animal, so that a considerable number
of skins would be required in order to make a covering which should
overlap a structure forty-five feet in length and fifteen in
breadth. Were it a solitary animal, there might be a difficulty in
procuring a sufficient number of skins. But it is partly gregarious
in its habits, living together in small families, seven or eight
being sometimes found to inhabit a single dwelling-place. It
is, therefore, sufficiently rare to make its skin valuable, and
sufficiently plentiful to furnish the requisite number of skins.
All these facts tend to show that the cost of such a covering
must have been very great, even though it was the outermost, and,
consequently, the least valuable of the four. It has been suggested
that these skins were only used to lay over the lines where the
different sets of coverings overlapped each other, and that, in
consequence, they need not have been very numerous.
[Illustration: SUPPOSED FORM AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE TABERNACLE,
CAMP, ETC.]
But we find that these same skins, which were evidently those
which formed the external roof, were used, when the Tabernacle was
taken down, for the purpose of forming distinct coverings for the
ark of the testimony, the table of shewbread, the seven-branched
candlestick, the golden altar, the various vessels used in the
ministrations, and lastly, the altar of sacrifice itself. Thus, when
we recollect the dimensions of the ark, the table, the candlestick,
and the two altars, we shall see that, in order to make separate
covers for them, a quantity of material would be used which would be
amply sufficient to cover the whole roof of the Tabernacle, even if
it had, as was most probably the case, a ridged, and not a flat roof.
We now come to our next point, namely, the aptitude of the Badger's
skin to resist weather. Any one who has handled the skin of the
Badger will acknowledge that a better material could hardly be
found. The fur is long, thick, and, though light, is moderately
stiff, the hairs falling over each other in such a manner as to
throw off rain or snow as off a penthouse. And, as to the third
point, namely, its possible use as a material for the manufacture
of shoes, we may call to mind that the skin of the Badger is
proverbially tough, and that this very quality has caused the animal
to be subjected to most cruel treatment by a class of sporting men
which is now almost extinct.
The Septuagint gives little assistance in determining the precise
nature of the Tachash, and rather seems to consider the word as
expressive of the colour with which the fur was dyed than that of
the animal from which it was taken. Still, it must be remembered
that not only are zoological terms used very loosely in the
Scriptures, but that in Hebrew, as in all other languages, the same
combination of letters often expresses two different ideas, so
that the word Tachash may equally signify a colour and an animal.
Moreover, it has been well pointed out that the repeated use of the
word in the plural number shows that it cannot refer to colour;
while its almost invariable combination with the Hebrew word that
signifies a skin implies that it does not refer to colour, but to an
animal.
What that animal may be, is, as I have already mentioned,
conjectural. But, as the authorized translation renders the word as
Badger, and as this reading fulfils the conditions necessary to its
identification, and as no other reading does fulfil them, we cannot
be very far wrong if we accept that translation as the correct one,
and assume the Tachash of the Scriptures to be the animal which we
call by the name of Badger.
THE BEAR.
The Syrian Bear--Identity of the Hebrew and Arabic titles--Its
colour variable according to age--Bears once numerous in
Palestine, and now only occasionally seen--Reason for their
diminution--Present localities of the Bear, and its favourite
haunts--Food of the Bear--Its general habits--Its ravages among
the flocks--The Bear dangerous to mankind--The Bear robbed of
her whelps--Illustrative passages--Its mode of fighting--Various
references to the Bear, from the time of Samuel to that of St.
John.
Whatever doubt may exist as to the precise identity of various
animals mentioned in the Scriptures, there is none whatever as to
the creature which is frequently alluded to under the name of Bear.
The Hebrew word is _Dôb_, and it is a remarkable fact that the name
of this animal in the Arabic language is almost identical with the
Hebrew term, namely, _Dubh_. The peculiar species of Bear which
inhabits Palestine is the Syrian Bear (_Ursus Isabellinus_), and,
though it has been variously described by different eye-witnesses,
there is no doubt that the same species was seen by them all. As is
the case with many animals, the Syrian Bear changes its colour as
it grows older. When a cub, it is of a darkish brown, which becomes
a light brown as it approaches maturity. But, when it has attained
its full growth, it becomes cream-coloured, and each succeeding year
seems to lighten its coat, so that a very old Bear is nearly as
white as its relative of the Arctic regions. Travellers, therefore,
who have met the younger specimens, have described them as brown in
hue, while those who have seen more aged individuals have stated
that the colour of the Syrian Bear is white.
Owing to the destruction of forests, the Bear, which is essentially
a lover of the woods, has decreased considerably in number. Yet,
even at the present time, specimens may be seen by the watchful
traveller, mostly about the range of Lebanon, but sometimes at a
considerable distance from that locality. Mr. Tristram, for example,
saw it close to the Lake of Gennesaret. "We never met with so many
wild animals as on one of those days. First of all, a wild boar got
out of some scrub close to us, as we were ascending the valley. Then
a deer was started below, ran up the cliff, and wound along the
ledge, passing close to us. Then a large ichneumon almost crossed my
feet and ran into a cleft; and, while endeavouring to trace him, I
was amazed to see a brown Syrian Bear clumsily but rapidly clamber
down the rocks and cross the ravine. He was, however, far too
cautious to get within hailing distance of any of the riflemen."
The same author mentions that some of the chief strongholds of this
Bear are certain clefts in the face of a precipitous chasm through
which the river Leontes flows. This river runs into the sea a few
miles northward of Tyre, and assists in carrying off the melted
snows from the Lebanon range of mountains. His description is so
picturesque, that it must be given in his own words. "The channel,
though a thousand feet deep, was so narrow that the opposite ridge
was within gunshot. Looking down the giddy abyss, we could see the
cliff on our side partially covered with myrtle, bay, and caper
hanging from the fissures, while the opposite side was perforated
with many shallow caves, the inaccessible eyries of vultures,
eagles, and lanner falcons, which were sailing in multitudes around.
The lower part had many ledges clad with shrubs, the strongholds
of the Syrian Bear, though inaccessible even to goats. Far beneath
dashed the milk-white river, a silver line in a ruby setting of
oleanders, roaring doubtless fiercely, but too distant to be heard
at the height on which we stood. This _cleft_ of the Leontes was the
only true Alpine scenery we had met with in Palestine, and in any
country, and amidst any mountains, it would attract admiration."
[Illustration: BEARS DESCENDING THE MOUNTAINS.]
On those elevated spots the Bear loves to dwell, and throughout the
summer-time generally remains in such localities. For the Bear is
one of the omnivorous animals, and is able to feed on vegetable as
well as animal substances, preferring the former when they can be
found. There is nothing that a Bear likes better than strawberries
and similar fruits, among which it will revel throughout the whole
fruit season, daintily picking the ripest berries, and becoming
wonderfully fat by the constant banquet. Sometimes, when the fruits
fail, it makes incursions among the cultivated grounds, and is noted
for the ravages which it makes among a sort of vetch which is much
grown in the Holy Land.
But during the colder months of the year the Bear changes its diet,
and becomes carnivorous. Sometimes it contents itself with the
various wild animals which it can secure, but sometimes it descends
to the lower plains, and seizes upon the goats and sheep in their
pastures. This habit is referred to by David, in his well-known
speech to Saul, when the king was trying to dissuade him from
matching himself against the gigantic Philistine. "And Saul said
to David, Thou art not able to go against this Philistine to fight
with him: for thou art but a youth, and he a man of war from his
youth.... Thy servant kept his father's sheep, and there came a
lion and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock: and I went out
after him, and smote him, and delivered it out of his hand; and
when he arose against me, I caught him by the beard, and smote him,
and slew him. Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear: and this
uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them, seeing he hath
defied the armies of the living God."--1 Sam. xvii. 33-36.
[Illustration: ON THE WATCH.]
Though not generally apt to attack mankind, it will do so if first
attacked, and then becomes a most dangerous enemy. See, for example,
that most graphic passage in the book of the prophet Amos, whose
business as a herdsman must have made him conversant with the
habits, not only of the flocks and herds which he kept, but of the
wild beasts which might devour them:--"Woe unto you that desire the
day of the Lord! to what end is it for you? the day of the Lord is
darkness, and not light. As if a man did flee from a lion, and a
bear met him; or went into a house, and leaned his hand on the wall,
and a serpent bit him." (v. 19.)
Another reference to the dangerous character of the Bear is made in
2 Kings ii. 23, 24, in which is recorded that two she-bears came out
of the wood near Bethel, and killed forty-two of the children that
mocked at Elisha.
As the Bear is not swift of foot, but rather clumsy in its
movements, it cannot hope to take the nimbler animals in open chase.
It prefers to lie in wait for them in the bushes, and to strike them
down with a sudden blow of its paw, a terrible weapon, which it can
wield as effectively as the lion uses its claws. An allusion to this
habit is made in the Lamentations of Jeremiah (iii. 10), "He was
unto me as a bear lying in wait, and as a lion in secret places."
Harmless to man as it generally is, there are occasions on which
it becomes a terrible and relentless foe, not seeking to avoid his
presence, but even searching for him, and attacking him as soon
as seen. In the proper season of the year, hunters, or those who
are travelling through those parts of the country infested by the
Bear, will sometimes find the cubs, generally two in number, their
mother having left them in the den while she has gone to search for
food. Although they would not venture to take the initiative in an
attack upon either of the parents, they are glad of an opportunity
which enables them to destroy one or two Bears without danger to
themselves. The young Bears are easily killed or carried off,
because at a very early age they are as confident as they are weak,
and do not try to escape when they see the hunters approaching.
The only danger lies in the possibility that their deed may be
discovered by the mother before they can escape from the locality,
and, if she should happen to return while the robbers are still in
the neighbourhood, a severe conflict is sure to follow. At any time
an angry Bear is a terrible antagonist, especially if it be wounded
with sufficient severity to cause pain, and not severely enough to
cripple its movements. But, when to this easily-roused ferocity is
added the fury of maternal feelings, it may be imagined that the
hunters have good reason to fear its attack.
[Illustration: SEEKING AN OUTLOOK.]
To all animals that rear their young is given a sublime and almost
supernatural courage in defending their offspring, and from the
lioness, that charges a host of armed men when her cubs are in
danger, to the hen, which defies the soaring kite or prowling fox,
or to the spider, that will give up her life rather than abandon
her yet unhatched brood, the same self-sacrificing spirit actuates
them all. Most terrible therefore is the wrath of a creature which
possesses, as is the case of the Bear, the strongest maternal
affections, added to great size, tremendous weapons, and gigantic
strength. That the sight of a Bear bereaved of her young was well
known to both writers and contemporary readers of the Old Testament,
is evident from the fact that it is mentioned by several writers,
and always as a familiar illustration of furious anger. See for
example 2 Sam. xvii. 8, when Hushai is dissuading Absalom from
following the cautious counsel of Ahithophel, "For thou knowest thy
father and his men, that they be mighty men of war, and they be
chafed in their minds as a bear robbed of her whelps in the field."
Solomon also, in the Proverbs (xvii. 12), uses the same image, "Let
a bear robbed of her whelps meet a man, rather than a fool in his
folly."
When the Bear fights, it delivers rapid strokes with its armed paw,
tearing and rending away everything that it strikes. A blow from a
bear's paw has been several times known to strip the entire skin,
together with the hair, from a man's head, and, when fighting with
dogs, to tear its enemies open as if each claw were a chisel.
Bears are capable of erecting themselves on their hinder limbs, and
of supporting themselves in an upright position with the greatest
ease. When attacked in close combat, they have a habit of rearing
themselves upon their hinder feet--a position which enables them to
deliver with the greatest effect the terrific blows with their fore
paws, upon which they chiefly rely in defending themselves.
With fearful ingenuity, the Bear, when engaged with a human foe,
directs its attack upon the head of its antagonist, and, as
previously stated, has been known to strike off the entire scalp
with a single blow.
[Illustration: A FAMILY-PARTY.]
A hunter who had the misfortune to be struck down by a Bear--and
the singular good fortune to afterwards escape from it--says, that
when he was lying on the ground at the mercy of the angry beast,
the animal, after biting him upon the arms and legs, deliberately
settled itself upon his head and began to scarify it in the fiercest
manner, leaving wounds eight and nine inches in length.
Bears are the more terrible antagonists from their extreme tenacity
of life, and the fearful energy which they compress into the last
moment of existence, when they are suffering from a mortal wound.
Unless struck in the heart or brain, the mortally-wounded Bear is
more to be feared than if it had received no injury whatever, and
contrives to wreak more harm in the few minutes that immediately
precede its death, than it had achieved while still uninjured.
Many a hunter has received mortal hurts by incautiously approaching
a Bear, which lay apparently dead, but was in reality only stunned.
[Illustration: bear]
[Illustration: porcupine]
THE PORCUPINE.
Presumed identity of the Kippôd with the Porcupine--Habits
of the Porcupine--the common Porcupine found plentifully in
Palestine.
Although, like the hedgehog, the Porcupine is not mentioned by name
in the Scriptures, many commentators think that the word Kippôd
signifies both the hedgehog and Porcupine.
That the two animals should be thought to be merely two varieties
of one species is not astonishing, when we remember the character
of the people among whom the Porcupine lives. Not having the least
idea of scientific geology, they look only to the most conspicuous
characteristics, and because the Porcupine and hedgehog are both
covered with an armature of quills, and the quills are far more
conspicuous than the teeth, the inhabitants of Palestine naturally
class the two animals together. In reality, they belong to two very
different orders, the hedgehog being classed with the shrew-mice and
moles, while the Porcupine is a rodent animal, and is classed with
the rats, rabbits, beavers, marmots, and other rodents.
It is quite as common in Palestine as the hedgehog, a fact which
increases the probability that the two animals may have been
mentioned under a common title. Being a nocturnal animal, it retires
during the day-time to some crevice in a rock or burrow in the
ground, and there lies sleeping until the sunset awakens it and
calls it to action. And as the hedgehog is also a nocturnal animal,
the similarity of habit serves to strengthen the mutual resemblance.
The Porcupine is peculiarly fitted for living in dry and unwatered
spots, as, like many other animals, of which our common rabbit is a
familiar example, it can exist without water, obtaining the needful
moisture from the succulent roots on which it feeds.
The sharply pointed quills with which its body is covered are solid,
and strengthened in a most beautiful manner by internal ribs, that
run longitudinally through them, exactly like those of the hollow
iron masts, which are now coming so much into use. As they are,
in fact, greatly developed hairs, they are continually shed and
replaced, and when they are about to fall are so loosely attached
that they fall off if pulled slightly, or even if the animal shakes
itself. Consequently the shed quills that lie about the localities
inhabited by the Porcupine indicate its whereabouts, and so
plentiful are these quills in some places, that quite a bundle can
be collected in a short time.
There are many species of Porcupines which inhabit different parts
of the world, but that which has been mentioned is the common
Porcupine of Europe, Asia, and Africa.
THE MOLE.
The two Hebrew words which are translated as Mole--Obscurity of
the former name--A parallel case in our own language--The second
name--The Moles and the Bats, why associated together--The
real Mole of Scripture, its different names, and its place
in zoology--Description of the Mole-rat and its general
habits--Curious superstition--Discovery of the species by Mr.
Tristram--Scripture and science--How the Mole-rat finds its
food--Distinction between the Mole and the present animal.
There are two words which are translated as Mole in our authorized
version of the Bible. One of them is so obscure that there seems no
possibility of deciding the creature that is represented by it. We
cannot even tell to what class of the animal kingdom it refers,
because in more than one place it is mentioned as one of the unclean
birds that might not be eaten (translated as _swan_ in our version),
whereas, in another place, it is enumerated among the unclean
creeping things.
[Illustration: THE MOLE-RAT.]
We may conjecture that the same word might be used to designate two
distinct animals, though we have no clue to their identification. It
is rather a strange coincidence, in corroboration of this theory,
that our word Mole signifies three distinct objects--firstly, an
animal; secondly, a cutaneous growth; and thirdly, a bank of earth.
Now, supposing English to be a dead language, like the Hebrew, it
may well be imagined that a translator of an English book would feel
extremely perplexed when he saw the word Mole used in such widely
different senses.
The best Hebraists can do no more than offer a conjecture founded
on the structure of the word _Tinshemeth_, which is thought by some
to be the chameleon. Some think that it is the Mole, some the ibis,
some the salamander, while others consider it to be the centipede;
and in neither case have any decisive arguments been adduced.
We will therefore leave the former of these two names, and proceed
to the second, _Chephor-peroth_.
This word occurs in that passage of Isaiah which has already been
quoted when treating of the bat. "In that day a man shall cast his
idols of silver and his idols of gold, which they made each one to
himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; to go into the
clefts of the rocks and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear
of the Lord and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to
shake terribly the earth."
It is highly probable that the animal in question is the Mole of
Palestine, which is not the same as our European species, but is
much larger in size, and belongs to a different order of mammalia.
The true Mole is one of the insectivorous and carnivorous animals,
and is allied to the shrews and the hedgehogs; whereas the Mole of
Palestine (_Spalax typhlus_) is one of the rodents, and allied to
the rabbits, mice, marmots, and jerboas. A better term for it is the
Mole-rat, by which name it is familiar to zoologists. It is also
known by the names of Slepez and Nenni.
In length it is about eight inches, and its colour is a pale slate.
As is the case with the true Moles, the eyes are of very minute
dimensions, and are not visible through the thick soft fur with
which the whole head and body are covered. Neither are there any
visible external ears, although the ear is really very large, and
extremely sensitive to sound. This apparent privation of both
ears and eyes gives to the animal a most singular and featureless
appearance, its head being hardly recognisable as such but for
the mouth, and the enormous projecting teeth, which not only look
formidable, but really are so. There is a curious superstition in
the Ukraine, that if a man will dare to grasp a Mole-rat in his bare
hand, allow it to bite him, and then squeeze it to death, the hand
that did the deed will ever afterwards possess the virtue of healing
goitre or scrofula.
This animal is spread over a very large tract of country, and is
very common in Palestine. Mr. Tristram gives an interesting account
of its discovery. "We had long tried in vain to capture the Mole
of Palestine. Its mines and its mounds we had seen everywhere, and
reproached ourselves with having omitted the mole-trap among the
items of our outfit. From the size of the mounds and the shallowness
of the subterranean passages, we felt satisfied it could not be the
European species, and our hopes of solving the question were raised
when we found that one of them had taken up its quarters close to
our camp. After several vain attempts to trap it, an Arab one night
brought a live Mole in a jar to the tent. It was no Mole properly so
called, but the Mole-rat, which takes its place throughout Western
Asia. The man, having observed our anxiety to possess a specimen,
refused to part with it for less than a hundred piastres, and
scornfully rejected the twenty piastres I offered. Ultimately, Dr.
Chaplin purchased it for five piastres after our departure, and I
kept it alive for some time in a box, feeding it on sliced onions."
The same gentleman afterwards caught many of the Mole-rats, and
kept them in earthen vessels, as they soon gnawed their way through
wood. They fed chiefly on bulbs, but also ate sopped bread. Like
many other animals, they reposed during the day, and were active
throughout the night.
The author then proceeds to remark on the peculiarly appropriate
character of the prophecy that the idols should be cast to the
Moles and the bats. Had the European Mole been the animal to
which reference was made, there would have been comparatively
little significance in the connexion of the two names, because,
although both animals are lovers of darkness, they do not inhabit
similar localities. But the Mole-rat is fond of frequenting
deserted ruins and burial-places, so that the Moles and the bats
are really companions, and as such are associated together in the
sacred narrative. Here, as in many other instances, we find that
closer study of the Scriptures united to more extended knowledge
are by no means the enemies of religion, as some well-meaning,
but narrow-minded persons think. On the contrary, the Scriptures
were never so well understood, and their truth and force so well
recognised, as at the present day; and science has proved to be,
not the destroyer of the Bible, but its interpreter. We shall soon
cease to hear of "Science _versus_ the Bible," and shall substitute
"Science and the Bible _versus_ Ignorance and Prejudice."
The Mole-rat needs not to dig such deep tunnels as the true Moles,
because its food does not lie so deep. The Moles live chiefly upon
earthworms, and are obliged to procure them in the varying depths
to which they burrow. But the Mole-rat lives mostly upon roots,
preferring those of a bulbous nature. Now bulbous roots are, as
a rule, situated near the surface of the ground, and, therefore,
any animal which feeds upon them must be careful not to burrow too
deeply, lest it should pass beneath them. The shallowness of the
burrows is thus accounted for. Gardens are often damaged by this
animal, the root-crops, such as carrots and onions, affording plenty
of food without needing much exertion.
The Mole-rat does not keep itself quite so jealously secluded as
does our common Mole, but occasionally will come out of the burrow
and lie on the ground, enjoying the warm sunshine. Still it is not
easily to be approached; for though its eyes are almost useless, the
ears are so sharp, and the animal is so wary, that at the sound of a
footstep it instantly seeks the protection of its burrow, where it
may bid defiance to its foes.
How it obtains its food is a mystery. There seems to be absolutely
no method of guiding itself to the precise spot where a bulb may
be growing. It is not difficult to conjecture the method by which
the Mole discovers its prey. Its sensitive ears may direct it to
the spot where a worm is driving its way through the earth, and
should it come upon its prey, the very touch of the worm, writhing
in terror at the approach of its enemy, would be sufficient to act
as a guide. I have kept several Moles, and always noticed that,
though they would pass close to a worm without seeming to detect
its presence, either by sight or scent, at the slightest touch they
would spring round, dart on the worm, and in a moment seize it
between their jaws. But with the Mole-rat the case is different. The
root can utter no sound, and can make no movement, nor is it likely
that the odour of the bulb should penetrate through the earth to a
very great distance.
[Illustration: mice]
THE MOUSE.
The Mice which marred the land--The Field-mouse--Its destructive
habits and prolific nature--The Hamster, and its habits--The
Jerboa, its activity and destructiveness--Various species of
Dormice and Sand-rats.
That the Mouse mentioned in the Old Testament was some species
of rodent animal is tolerably clear, though it is impossible to
state any particular species as being signified by the Hebrew word
_Akbar_. The probable derivation of this name is from two words
which signify "destruction of corn," and it is therefore evident
that allusion is made to some animal which devours the produce of
the fields, and which exists in sufficient numbers to make its
voracity formidable.
Some commentators on the Old Testament translate the word Akbar
as jerboa. Now, although the jerboa is common in Syria, it is not
nearly so plentiful as other rodent animals, and would scarcely
be selected as the means by which a terrible disaster is made to
befall a whole country. The student of Scripture is well aware
that, in those exceptional occurrences which are called miracles, a
needless development of the wonder-working power is never employed.
We are not to suppose, for example, that the clouds of locusts that
devoured the harvests of the Egyptians were created for this express
purpose, but that their already existing hosts were concentrated
upon a limited area, instead of being spread over a large surface.
Nor need we fancy that the frogs which rendered their habitations
unclean, and contaminated their food, were brought into existence
simply to inflict a severe punishment on the fastidious and
superstitious Egyptians.
Of course, had such an exercise of creative power been needed, it
would have been used, but we can all see that a needless miracle
is never worked. He who would not suffer even a crumb of the
miraculously multiplied bread to be wasted, is not likely to waste
that power by which the miracle was wrought.
[Illustration: DAGON FALLEN DOWN BEFORE THE ARK.]
If we refer to the early history of the Israelitish nation, as
told in 1 Sam. iv.-vi., we shall find that the Israelites made an
unwarrantable use of the ark, by taking it into battle, and that it
was captured and carried off into the country of the Philistines.
Then various signs were sent to warn the captors to send the ark
back to its rightful possessors. Dagon, their great god, was
prostrated before it, painful diseases attacked them, so that many
died, and scarcely any seem to have escaped, while their harvests
were ravaged by numbers of "mice that marred the land."
[Illustration: MOUSE AND NEST.]
The question is now simple enough. If the ordinary translation is
accepted, and the word Akbar rendered as Mouse, would the necessary
conditions be fulfilled, _i.e._ would the creature be destructive,
and would it exist in very great numbers? Now we shall find that
both these conditions are fulfilled by the common Field-mouse.
This little creature is, in proportion to its size, one of the most
destructive animals in the world. Let its numbers be increased from
any cause whatever, and it will most effectually "mar the land." It
will devour every cereal that is sown, and kill almost any sapling
that is planted. It does not even wait for the corn to spring up,
but will burrow beneath the surface, and dig out the seed before it
has had time to sprout. In the early part of the year, it will eat
the green blade as soon as it springs out of the ground, and is an
adept at climbing the stalks of corn, and plundering the ripe ears
in the autumn.
[Illustration: JERBOA, OR LEAPING MOUSE.]
When stacked or laid up in barns, the harvest is by no means safe,
for the Mice will penetrate into any ordinary barn, and find their
way into any carelessly-built stack, from which they can scarcely be
ejected. The rat itself is not so dire a foe to the farmer, as the
less obtrusive, but equally mischievous Field-mouse. The ferret will
drive the rats out of their holes, and if they have taken possession
of a wheat-stack they can be ejected by depriving them of access to
water. But the burrows of the Field-mouse are so small that a ferret
cannot make its way through them, and the nightly dew that falls on
the stack affords an ample supply of water.
[Illustration: THE FIELD-MOUSE.]
When the Field-mouse is deprived of the food which it loves best,
it finds a subsistence among the trees. Whenever mice can discover
a newly-planted sapling, they hold great revel upon it, eating away
the tender young bark as high as they can reach, and consequently
destroying the tree as effectually as if it were cut down. Even
when the young trees fail them, and no tender bark is to be had,
the Field-mice can still exert their destructive powers. They will
then betake themselves to the earth, burrow beneath its surface,
and devour the young rootlets of the forest trees. All botanists
know that a healthy tree is continually pushing forward fresh roots
below the ground, in order to gain sufficient nourishment to supply
the increasing growth above. If, therefore, these young roots are
destroyed, the least harm that can happen to the tree is that its
further growth is arrested; while, in many cases, the tree, which
cannot repair the injuries it has received, droops gradually, and
finally dies. Even in this country, the Field-mouse has proved
itself a terrible enemy to the agriculturist, and has devastated
considerable tracts of land.
So much for the destructive powers of the Field-mouse, and the next
point to be considered is its abundance.
Nearly all the rats and mice are singularly prolific animals,
producing a considerable number at a brood, and having several
broods in a season. The Field-mouse is by no means an exception to
the general rule, but produces as many young in a season as any of
the Mice.
Not only is it formidable from its numbers, but from the insidious
nature of its attacks. Any one can see a rabbit, a hare, or even
a rat; but to see a Field-mouse is not easy, even when the little
creatures are present in thousands. A Field-mouse never shows itself
except from necessity, its instinct teaching it to escape the
observation of its many furred and feathered enemies. Short-legged
and soft-furred, it threads its noiseless way among the herbage
with such gentle suppleness that scarcely a grass-blade is stirred,
while, if it should be forced to pass over a spot of bare ground,
the red-brown hue of its fur prevents it from being detected by an
inexperienced eye. Generally the Field-mouse is safe from human
foes, and has only to dread the piercing eye and swift wings of the
hawk, or the silent flight and sharp talons of the owl.
Although there can be no doubt that the Field-mouse is one of the
animals to which the name of Akbar is given, it is probable that
many species were grouped under this one name. Small rodents of
various kinds are very plentiful in Palestine, and there are several
species closely allied to the Field-mouse itself.
Among them is the Hamster (_Cricetus frumentarius_), so widely
known for the ravages which it makes among the crops. This terribly
destructive animal not only steals the crops for immediate
subsistence, but lays up a large stock of provisions for the winter,
seeming to be actuated by a sort of miserly passion for collecting
and storing away. There seems to be no bounds to the quantity of
food which a Hamster will carry into its subterranean store-house,
from seventy to one hundred pounds' weight being sometimes taken
out of the burrow of a single animal. The fact of the existence
of these large stores shows that the animal must need them, and
accordingly we find that the Hamster is only a partial hibernator,
as it is awake during a considerable portion of the winter months,
and is consequently obliged to live on the stores which it has
collected.
It is an exceedingly prolific animal, each pair producing on an
average twenty-five young in the course of a year. The families
are unsociable, and, as soon as they are strong enough to feed
themselves, the young Hamsters leave their home, and make separate
burrows for themselves. Thus we see that the Hamster, as well as the
Field-mouse, fulfils the conditions which are needed in order to
class it under the general title of Akbar.
I have already stated that some translators of the Bible use the
word Jerboa as a rendering of the Hebrew Akbar. As the Jerboa
certainly is found in Palestine, there is some foundation for this
idea, and we may safely conjecture that it also is one of the
smaller rodents which are grouped together under the appellation of
Mouse.
The Common Jerboa (_Dipus Ægyptiacus_) is plentiful in Palestine,
and several other species inhabit the same country, known at once
by their long and slender legs, which give them so curious a
resemblance to the kangaroos of Australia. The Jerboas pass over the
ground with astonishing rapidity. Instead of creeping stealthily
among the grass-blades, like the short-limbed field-mouse, the
Jerboa flies along with a succession of wonderful leaps, darting
here and there with such rapidity that the eye can scarcely follow
its wayward movements. When quiet and undisturbed, it hops along
gently enough, but as soon as it takes alarm, it darts off in its
peculiar manner, which is to the ordinary walk of quadrupeds what
the devious course of a frightened snipe is to the steady flight of
birds in general.
It prefers hot and dry situations, its feet being defended by a
thick coating of stiff hairs, which serve the double purpose of
protecting it from the heat, and giving it a firm hold on the
ground. It is rather a destructive animal, its sharp and powerful
teeth enabling it to bite its way through obstacles which would
effectually stop an ordinary Mouse. That the Jerboa may be one of
the Akbarim is rendered likely by the prohibition in Lev. xi. 29,
forbidding the Mouse to be eaten. It would be scarcely probable
that such a command need have been issued against eating the common
Mouse, whereas the Jerboa, a much larger and palatable animal, is
always eaten by the Arabs. The Hamster is at the present day eaten
in Northern Syria.
Beside these creatures there are the Dormice, several species of
which animal inhabit Palestine at the present day. There are also
the Sand-rats, one species of which is larger than our ordinary
rats. The Sand-rats live more in the deserts than the cultivated
lands, making their burrows at the foot of hills, and among the
roots of bushes.
THE HARE.
The prohibitions of the Mosaic law--The chewing of the
cud, and division of the hoof--Identity of the Hare of
Scripture--Rumination described--The Hare a rodent and not
a ruminant--Cowper and his Hares--Structure of the rodent
tooth--The Mosaic law accommodated to its recipients--The Hares
of Palestine and their habits.
Among the many provisions of the Mosaic law are several which refer
to the diet of the Israelites, and which prohibit certain kinds of
food. Special stress is laid upon the flesh of animals, and the list
of those which may be lawfully eaten is a singularly restricted one,
all being excluded except those which "divide the hoof and chew
the cud." And, lest there should be any mistake about the matter,
examples are given both of those animals which may and those which
may not be eaten.
The ox, sheep, goat, and antelopes generally are permitted as
lawful food, because they fulfil both conditions; whereas there is
a special prohibition of the swine, because it divides the hoof but
does not chew the cud, and of the camel, coney, and hare because
they chew the cud, but do not divide the hoof. Our business at
present is with the last of these animals.
Considerable discussion has been raised concerning this animal,
because, as is well known to naturalists, the Hare is not one of
the ruminant animals, but belongs to the same order as the rat,
rabbit, beaver, and other rodents. Neither its teeth nor its stomach
are constructed for the purpose of enabling it to ruminate, _i.e._
to return into the mouth the partially-digested food, and then to
masticate it afresh; and therefore it has been thought that either
there is some mistake in the sacred narrative or that the Hebrew
word has been mistranslated.
[Illustration: THE SYRIAN HARE.]
Taking the latter point first, as being the simplest of the two, we
find that the Hebrew word which is rendered as Hare is Arnebeth, and
that it is rendered in the Septuagint as Dasypus, or the Hare,--a
rendering which the Jewish Bible adopts. That the Arnebeth is really
the Hare may also be conjectured from the fact that the Arabic name
for that animal is Arneb. In consequence of the rather wide sense
to which the Greek word Dasypus (_i.e._ hairy-foot) is used, some
commentators have suggested that the rabbit may have been included
in the same title. This, however, is not at all likely, inasmuch as
the Hare is very plentiful in Palestine, and the rabbit is believed
not to be indigenous to that part of the world. And, even if the two
animals had been classed under the same title, the physiological
difficulty would not be removed.
Before proceeding further, it will be as well to give a brief
description of the curious act called rumination, or "chewing the
cud."
There are certain animals, such as the oxen, antelopes, deer,
sheep, goats, camels, &c. which have teeth unfitted for the rapid
mastication of food, and which therefore are supplied with a
remarkable apparatus by which the food can be returned into the
mouth when the animal has leisure, and be re-masticated before it
passes into the true digestive organs.
For this purpose they are furnished with four stomachs, which are
arranged in the following order. First comes the paunch or "rumen"
(whence the word "ruminating"), into which passes the food in a
very rough state, just as it is torn, rather than bitten, from the
herbage, and which is analogous to the crop in birds. It thence
passes into the second stomach, or "honeycomb," the walls of which
are covered with small angular cells. Into those cells the food is
received from the first stomach, and compressed into little balls,
which can be voluntarily returned into the mouth for mastication.
After the second mastication has been completed, the food passes at
once into the third stomach, and thence into the fourth, which is
the true digesting cavity. By a peculiar structure of these organs,
the animal is able to convey its food either into the first or third
stomach, at will, _i.e._ into the first when the grass is eaten, and
into the third after rumination. Thus it will be seen that an animal
which chews the cud must have teeth of a certain character, and be
possessed of the fourfold stomach which has just been described.
Two points are conceded which seem to be utterly irreconcilable with
each other. The first is that the Mosaic law distinctly states that
the Hare chews the cud; the second is that in point of fact the
Hare is not, and cannot be, a ruminating animal, possessing neither
the teeth nor the digestive organs which are indispensable for that
process. Yet, totally opposed as these statements appear to be, they
are in fact, not so irreconcilable as they seem.
[Illustration: A TIMID GROUP.]
Why the flesh of certain animals was prohibited, we do not at the
present time know. That the flesh of swine should be forbidden food
is likely enough, considering the effects which the habitual eating
of swine's flesh is said to produce in hot countries. But it does
seem very strange that the Israelites should have been forbidden
to eat the flesh of the camel, the coney (or hyrax), and the Hare,
and that these animals should have been specified is a proof that
the eating or refraining from their flesh was not a mere sanitary
regulation, but was a matter of importance. The flesh of all these
three animals is quite as good and nutritious as that of the oxen,
or goats, which are eaten in Palestine, and that of the Hare is far
superior to them. Therefore, the people of Israel, who were always
apt to take liberties with the restrictive laws, and were crafty
enough to evade them on so many occasions, would have been likely
to pronounce that the flesh of the Hare was lawful meat, because
the animal chewed the cud, or appeared to do so, and they would
discreetly have omitted the passage which alluded to the division of
the hoof.
To a non-scientific observer the Hare really does appear to chew
the cud. When it is reposing at its ease, it continually moves its
jaws about as if eating something, an action which may readily
be mistaken for true rumination. Even Cowper, the poet, who kept
some hares for several years, and had them always before his eyes,
was deceived by this mumbling movement of the jaws. Speaking of
his favourite hare, "Puss," he proceeds as follows: "Finding him
exceedingly tractable, I made it my custom to carry him always after
breakfast into the garden, where he hid himself generally under the
leaves of a cucumber vine, sleeping, _or chewing the cud_, till
evening."
The real object of this continual grinding or mumbling movement is
simple enough. The chisel-like incisor teeth of the rodent animals
need to be rubbed against each other, in order to preserve their
edge and shape, and if perchance such friction should be wanting to
a tooth, as, for example, by the breaking of the opposite tooth,
it becomes greatly elongated, and sometimes grows to such a length
as to prevent the animal from eating. Instinctively, therefore,
the Hare, as well as the rabbit and other rodents, always likes to
be nibbling at something, as any one knows who has kept rabbits in
wooden hutches, the object of this nibbling not being to eat the
wood, but to keep the teeth in order.
But we may naturally ask ourselves, why the Mosaic law, an emanation
from heaven, should mention an animal as being a ruminant, when its
very structure shows that such an act was utterly impossible? The
answer is clear enough. The law was suited to the capacity of those
for whom it was intended, and was never meant to be a handbook of
science, as well as a code of religious duties and maxims. The Jews,
like other Orientals, were indifferent to that branch of knowledge
which we designate by the name of physical science, and it was
necessary that the language in which the law was conveyed to them
should be accommodated to their capabilities of receiving it.
It would have been worse than useless to have interrupted the solemn
revelation of Divine will with a lesson in comparative anatomy; the
object of the passage in question being, not to teach the Jews the
distinctive characteristics of a rodent and a ruminant, but to guard
against their mistaking the Hare for one of the ruminants which
were permitted as food. That they would in all probability have
fallen into that mistake is evident from the fact that the Arabs are
exceedingly fond of the flesh of the Hare, and accept it, as well as
the camel, as lawful food, because it chews the cud, the division of
the hoof not being considered by them as an essential.
Hares are very plentiful in Palestine, and at least two species are
found in that country. One of them, which inhabits the more northern
and hilly portion of Palestine, closely resembles our own species,
but has not ears quite so long in proportion, while the head is
broader. The second species, which lives in the south, and in the
valley of the Jordan, is very small, is of a light dun colour, and
has very long ears. In their general habits, these Hares resemble
the Hare of England.
CATTLE.
The cattle of Palestine, and their decadence at the present
day--Ox-flesh not used for food in modern times--Oxen of
the stall, and oxen of the pasture--The use of the ox in
agriculture--The yoke and its structure--The plough and the
goad--The latter capable of being used as a weapon--Treading
out the corn--The cart and its wheels--The ox used as a
beast of burden--Cattle turned loose to graze--The bulls of
Bashan--Curiosity of the ox-tribe--A season of drought--Branding
the cattle--An Egyptian field scene--Cattle-keeping an
honourable post--The ox as used for sacrifice--Ox-worship--The
bull Apis, and his history--Persistency of the
bull-worship--Jeroboam's sin--Various names of cattle--The
Indian buffalo.
Under this head we shall treat of the domesticated oxen of
Scripture, whether mentioned as Bull, Cow, Ox, Calf, Heifer, &c.
Two distinct species of cattle are found in Palestine, namely, the
ordinary domesticated ox, and the Indian buffalo, which lives in the
low-lying and marshy valley of the Jordan. Of this species we shall
treat presently.
The domesticated cattle are very much like our own, but there is not
among them that diversity of breed for which this country is famous;
nor is there even any distinction of long and short horned cattle.
There are some places where the animals are larger than in others,
but this difference is occasioned simply by the better quality and
greater quantity of the food.
As is the case in most parts of the world where civilization
has made any progress, Domesticated Cattle were, and still are,
plentiful in Palestine. Even at the present time the cattle are in
common use, though it is evident, from many passages of Holy Writ,
that in the days of Judæa's prosperity cattle were far more numerous
than they are now, and were treated in a better fashion.
To take their most sacred use first, a constant supply of cattle
was needed for the sacrifices, and, as it was necessary that every
animal which was brought to the altar should be absolutely perfect,
it is evident that great care was required in order that the breed
should not deteriorate, a skill which has long been rendered useless
by the abandonment of the sacrifices.
[Illustration: ALTAR OF BURNT-OFFERING.]
Another reason for their better nurture in the times of old is that
in those days the ox was largely fed and fatted for the table, just
as is done with ourselves. At the present day, the flesh of the
cattle is practically unused as food, that of the sheep or goat
being always employed, even when a man gives a feast to his friends.
But, in the old times, stalled oxen, _i.e._ oxen kept asunder from
those which were used for agricultural purposes, and expressly
fatted for the table, were in constant use. See for example the
well-known passage in the Prov. xv. 17, "Better is a dinner of herbs
where love is, than a stalled ox and hatred therewith." Again,
the Prophet Jeremiah makes use of a curious simile, "Egypt is
like a very fair heifer, but destruction cometh; it cometh out of
the north. Also her hired men are in the midst of her like fatted
bullocks [or, bullocks of the stall], for they also are turned
back, and are fled away together." (Jer. xlvi. 20.) And in 1 Kings
iv. 22, 23, when describing the glories of Solomon's household,
the sacred writer draws a distinction between the oxen which were
especially fattened for the table of the king and the superior
officers, and those which were consumed by the lower orders of his
household: "And Solomon's provision for one day was thirty measures
of fine flour, and threescore measures 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."
[Illustration: THE PRODIGAL SON RETURNS, AND THE FATTED CALF IS
KILLED.]
Calves--mostly, if not always, bull-calves--were largely used
for food in Palestine, and in the households of the wealthy were
fatted for the table. See, for example, the familiar parable of
the prodigal son, in which the rejoicing father is mentioned as
preparing a great feast in honour of his son's return, and ordering
the fatted calf to be killed--the calf in question being evidently
one of the animals that were kept in good condition against any
festive occasion. And, even in the earliest history of the Bible,
the custom of keeping a fatted calf evidently prevailed, as is shown
by the conduct of Abraham, who, when he was visited by the three
heavenly guests, "ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf, tender
and good," and had it killed and dressed at once, after the still
existing fashion of the East.
[Illustration: ABRAHAM OFFERS FOOD TO THE THREE STRANGERS.]
But, even in the times of Israel's greatest prosperity, the chief
use of the ox was as an agricultural labourer, thus reversing the
custom of this country, where the horse has taken the place of the
ox as a beast of draught, and where cattle are principally fed for
food. Ploughing was, and is, always performed by oxen, and allusions
to this office are scattered plentifully through the Old and New
Testaments.
When understood in this sense, oxen are almost always spoken of in
connexion with the word "yoke," and as each yoke comprised two oxen,
it is evident that the word is used as we employ the term "brace,"
or pair. The yoke, which is the chief part of the harness, is a very
simple affair. A tolerably stout beam of wood is cut of a sufficient
length to rest upon the necks of the oxen standing side by side,
and a couple of hollows are scooped out to receive the crest of the
neck. In order to hold it in its place, two flexible sticks are bent
under their necks, and the ends fixed into the beam of the yoke. In
the middle of this yoke is fastened the pole of the plough or cart,
and this is all the harness that is used, not even traces being
required.
It will be seen that so rude an implement as this would be very
likely to gall the necks of the animals, unless the hollows were
carefully smoothed, and the heavy beam adapted to the necks of
the animals. This galling nature of the yoke, so familiar to the
Israelites, is used repeatedly as a metaphor in many passages of
the Old and New Testaments. These passages are too numerous to be
quoted, but I will give one or two of the most conspicuous among
them. The earliest mention of the yoke in the Scriptures is a
metaphor.
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."
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.
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 was most probably
the case.
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 a new 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.
[Illustration: OXEN TREADING OUT GRAIN.]
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: EASTERN OX-CART.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: THE ARK OF THE COVENANT BEING DRAWN BY COWS.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: PLOUGHING WITH OXEN.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: MUMMY OF A SACRED BULL TAKEN FROM AN EGYPTIAN TOMB.]
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.
[Illustration: ANIMALS BEING SOLD FOR SACRIFICE IN THE PORCH OF THE
TEMPLE.]
[Illustration: JEROBOAM SETS UP A GOLDEN CALF AT BETHEL.]
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.
[Illustration: THE BUFFALO.]
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.
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.
In the picture which appears on a following page, one of these
domesticated Buffaloes is represented, harnessed with a camel, to a
rude form of plough used in the East.
[Illustration: THE BHAINSA, OR DOMESTIC BUFFALO, AND CAMEL, DRAWING
THE PLOUGH.]
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 31, 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.
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.
[Illustration: WILD BULL, OR ORYX.]
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.
[Illustration: THE ORYX.]
[Illustration: unicorn]
THE UNICORN.
The Unicorn apparently known to the Jews--Its evident connection
with the Ox tribe--Its presumed identity with the now extinct
Urus--Enormous size and dangerous character of the Urus.
There are many animals mentioned in the Scriptures which are
identified with difficulty, 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.
Even in late years the Unicorn has been erroneously supposed to be
identical with the Rhinoceros of India. It is, however, now certain
that the Unicorn 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.
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. At the present day naturalists are nearly
all agreed that the Unicorn of the Old Testament must have been of
the Ox tribe. Probably the Urus, a species now extinct, was the
animal alluded to. 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 Unicorn 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 Unicorn; 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 beast, as is evident from the
skulls and other bones which have been discovered. Their character
also indicates that the creature was nothing more than a very large
Ox, probably measuring twelve feet in length, and six feet in
height. Such a wild animal, armed, as it was, with enormous horns,
would prove a most formidable antagonist.
[Illustration: bison]
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.
[Illustration: BISON KILLING WOLF.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: gazelle]
THE GAZELLE, OR ROE OF SCRIPTURE.
Its swiftness, its beauty, and the quality of its
flesh--Different varieties of the Gazelle--How the Gazelle
defends itself against wild beasts--Chase 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 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.
[Illustration: THE GAZELLE.]
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.
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 manœuvre,
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.
[Illustration: THE FALCON USED IN OUR HUNT.]
"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.
[Illustration: THE ARAB IS DELIGHTED AT THE SUCCESS OF THE HUNT.]
"The Arab is wild in his transports of delight. More certain of
the prowess of his bird than ourselves, he had stopped awhile to
gather together the fruits of our booty, and now galloped furiously
up, waving his long gun, and 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.
[Illustration: THE GAZELLE.]
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.
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.]
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.
[Illustration: decoration]
THE FALLOW-DEER, OR BUBALE.
The word Jachmur evidently represents a species of
antelope--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 143. 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.]
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. "Harts and Roebucks
and Fallow-Deer" are the wild animals mentioned in the passage
alluded to.
[Illustration: sheep and birds]
THE SHEEP.
Importance of Sheep in the Bible--The Sheep the chief wealth
of the pastoral tribes--Arab shepherds of the present
day--Wanderings of the flocks in search of food--Value of the
wells--How the Sheep are watered--The shepherd usually a part
owner of the flocks--Structure of the sheepfolds--The rock
caverns of Palestine--David's adventure with Saul--Use of the
dogs--The broad-tailed Sheep, and its peculiarities.
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.
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.
[Illustration: ARABS JOURNEYING TO FRESH PASTURES.]
"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....
[Illustration: VIEW OF THE PYRAMIDS.]
"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.
[Illustration: JACOB MEETS RACHEL AT THE WELL.]
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.
[Illustration: EASTERN SHEPHERD WATCHING HIS FLOCK.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: DAVID GATHERS STONES FROM THE BROOK TO CAST AT
GOLIATH.]
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.
[Illustration: AN EASTERN SHEPHERD.]
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.
[Illustration: SHEEP FOLLOWING THEIR SHEPHERD.]
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.
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."
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.
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 sheepfold, and Himself to the door.
"He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, 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."
[Illustration: ANCIENT SHEEP PEN.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: THE POOR MAN'S LAMB.]
[Illustration: THE RICH MAN'S FEAST.]
"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."
This last sentence reminds us that there are two breeds of Sheep
in Palestine. One much resembles the ordinary English Sheep, while
the other is a very different animal. It is much taller on its
legs, larger-boned, and long-nosed. Only the rams have horns, and
they are not twisted spirally like those of our own Sheep, but
come backwards, and then curl round so that the point comes under
the ear. The great peculiarity of this Sheep is the tail, which
is simply prodigious in point of size, and is an enormous mass
of fat. Indeed, the long-legged and otherwise lean animal seems
to concentrate all its fat in the tail, which, as has been well
observed, appears to abstract both flesh and fat from the rest of
the body. So great is this strange development, that the tail alone
will sometimes weigh one-fifth as much as the entire animal. A
similar breed of Sheep is found in Southern Africa and other parts
of the world. In some places, the tail grows to such an enormous
size that, in order to keep so valuable a part of the animal from
injury, it is fastened to a small board, supported by a couple of
wheels, so that the Sheep literally wheels its own tail in a cart.
Frequent reference to the fat of the tail is made in the Authorized
Version of the Scriptures, though in terms which would not be
understood did we not know that the Sheep which is mentioned in
those passages is the long-tailed Sheep of Syria. See, for example,
the history narrated in Exod. xxix. 22, where special details
are given as to the ceremony by which Aaron and his sons were
consecrated to the priesthood. "Thou shalt take of the ram the fat
and the rump, and the fat that covereth the inwards, and the caul
above the liver, and the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them."
[Illustration: FLOCKS OF SHEEP BEING TAKEN INTO JERUSALEM.]
Though this particular breed is not very distinctly mentioned in
the Bible, the Talmudical writers have many allusions to it. In
the Mischna these broad-tailed Sheep are not allowed to leave
their folds on the Sabbath-day, because by wheeling their little
tail-waggons behind them they would break the Sabbath. The writers
describe the tail very graphically, comparing its shape to that of
a saddle, and saying that it is fat, without bones, heavy and long,
and looks as if the whole body were continued beyond the hind-legs,
and thence hung down in place of a tail.
The Rabbinical writers treat rather fully of the Sheep, and give
some very amusing advice respecting their management. If the ewes
cannot be fattened in the ordinary manner, that end may be achieved
by tying up the udder so that the milk cannot flow, and the elements
which would have furnished milk are forced to produce fat. If the
weather should be chilly at the shearing time, and there is danger
of taking cold after the wool is removed, the shepherd should dip a
sponge in oil and tie it on the forehead of the newly-shorn animal.
Or, if he should not have a sponge by him, a woollen rag will do as
well. The same potent remedy is also efficacious if the Sheep should
be ill in lambing time.
That the Sheep is liable to the attack of the gadfly, which deposits
its eggs in the nostrils of the unfortunate animal, was as well
known in the ancient as in modern times. It is scarcely necessary
to mention that the insect in question is the _Æstrus ovis_.
Instinctively aware of the presence of this insidious and dreaded
enemy, which, though so apparently insignificant, is as formidable
a foe as any of the beasts of prey, the Sheep display the greatest
terror at the sharp, menacing sound produced by the gadfly's wings
as the insect sweeps through the air towards its destination. They
congregate together, placing their heads almost in contact with each
other, snort and paw the ground in their terror, and use all means
in their power to prevent the fly from accomplishing its purpose.
When a gadfly succeeds in attaining its aim, it rapidly deposits an
egg or two in the nostril, and then leaves them. The tiny eggs are
soon hatched by the natural heat of the animal, and the young larvæ
crawl up the nostril towards the frontal sinus. There they remain
until they are full-grown, when they crawl through the nostrils,
fall on the ground, burrow therein, and in the earth undergo their
changes into the pupal and perfect stages.
It need hardly be said that an intelligent shepherd would devote
himself to the task of killing every gadfly which he could find,
and, as these insects are fond of basking on sunny rocks or
tree-trunks, this is no very difficult matter.
The Rabbinical writers, however, being totally ignorant of practical
entomology, do not seem to have recognised the insect until it had
reached its full larval growth. They say that the rams manage to
shake the grubs out of their nostrils by butting at one another
in mimic warfare, and that the ewes, which are hornless, and are
therefore incapable of relieving themselves by such means, ought
to be supplied with plants which will make them sneeze, so that
they may shake out the grubs by the convulsive jerkings of the head
caused by inhaling the irritating substance.
The same writers also recommend that the rams should be furnished
with strong leathern collars.
When the flock is on the march, the rams always go in the van,
and, being instinctively afraid of their ancient enemy the wolf,
they continually raise their heads and look about them. This line
of conduct irritates the wolves, who attack the foremost rams and
seize them by the throat. If, therefore, a piece of stout leather be
fastened round the ram's neck, the wolf is baffled, and runs off in
sullen despair.
Generally, the oldest ram is distinguished by a bell, and, when
the flock moves over the hilly slopes, the Sheep walk in file
after the leader, making narrow paths, which are very distinct
from a distance, but are scarcely perceptible when the foot of the
traveller is actually upon them. From this habit has arisen an
ancient proverb, "As the sheep after the sheep, so the daughter
after the mother," a saying which is another form of our own
familiar proverb, "What is bred in the bone will not come out of the
flesh."
* * * * *
We now come to the Sheep considered with reference to its uses.
First and foremost the Sheep was, and still is, one of the chief
means of subsistence, being to the pastoral inhabitants of Palestine
what the oxen are to the pastoral inhabitants of Southern Africa.
To ordinary persons the flesh of the Sheep was a seldom-tasted
luxury; great men might eat it habitually, "faring sumptuously every
day," and we find that, among the glories of Solomon's reign, the
sacred chronicler has thought it worth while to mention that part of
the daily provision for his household included one hundred Sheep. No
particular pains seem to have been taken about the cooking of the
animal, which seems generally to have been boiled. As, however, in
such a climate the flesh could not be kept for the purpose of making
it tender, as is the case in this part of the world, it was cooked
as soon as the animal was killed, the fibres not having time to
settle into the rigidity of death.
Generally, when ordinary people had the opportunity of tasting the
flesh of the Sheep, it was on the occasion of some rejoicing,--such,
for example, as a marriage feast, or the advent of a guest, for
whom a lamb or a kid was slain and cooked on the spot, a young male
lamb being almost invariably chosen as less injurious than the ewe
to the future prospects of the flock. Roasting over a fire was
sometimes adopted, as was baking in an oven sunk in the ground, a
remarkable instance of which we shall see when we come to the Jewish
sacrifices. Boiling, however, was the principal mode; so much so,
indeed, that the Hebrew word which signifies boiling is used to
signify any kind of cooking, even when the meat was roasted.
The process of cooking and eating the Sheep was as follows.
The animal having been killed according to the legal form, the skin
was stripped off, and the body separated joint from joint, the right
shoulder being first removed. This, it will be remembered, was the
priest's portion; see Lev. vii. 32: "The right shoulder shall ye
give unto the priest for an heave offering of the sacrifices of your
peace offerings." The whole of the flesh was then separated from the
bones, and chopped small, and even the bones themselves broken up,
so that the marrow might not be lost.
A reference to this custom is found in Micah iii. 2, 3, "Who pluck
off their skin from off them, and their flesh from off their bones;
who also eat the flesh of my people ... and they break their bones,
and chop them in pieces, as for the pot, and as flesh within the
caldron." The reader will now understand more fully the force of
the prophecy, "He keepeth all His bones: not one of them is broken"
(Psa. xxxiv. 20).
The mixed mass of bones and flesh was then put into the caldron,
which was generally filled with water, but sometimes with milk, as
is the custom with the Bedouins of the present day, whose manners
are in many respects identical with those of the early Jews. It has
been thought by some commentators that the injunction not to "seethe
a kid in his mothers milk" (Deut. xiv. 21) referred to this custom.
I believe, however, that the expression "in his mother's milk" does
not signify that the flesh of the kid might not be boiled in its
mother's milk, but that a kid might not be taken which was still in
its mother's milk, _i.e._ unweaned.
Salt and spices were generally added to it; see Ezek. xxiv. 10:
"Heap on wood, kindle the fire, consume the flesh, and spice it
well." The surface was carefully skimmed, and, when the meat was
thoroughly cooked, it and the broth were served up separately. The
latter was used as a sort of sauce, into which unleavened bread was
dipped. So in Judges vi. 19 we read that when Gideon was visited by
the angel, according to the hospitable custom of the land, he "made
ready a kid, and unleavened cakes of an ephah of flour: the flesh he
put in a basket, and he put the broth in a pot, and brought it out
unto him under the oak, and presented it to him."
Valuable, however, as was the Sheep for this purpose, there has
always existed a great reluctance to kill the animal, the very sight
of the flocks being an intense gratification to a pastoral Oriental.
The principal part of the food supplied by the Sheep was, and is
still, the milk; which afforded abundant food without thinning the
number of the flock. As all know who have tasted it, the milk of the
Sheep is peculiarly rich, and in the East is valued much more highly
than that of cattle. The milk was seldom drunk in a fresh state, as
is usually the case with ourselves, but was suffered to become sour,
curdled, and semi-solid.
* * * * *
We now come to a portion of the Sheep scarcely less important than
the flesh and the milk, _i.e._ the fleece, or wool.
In the ancient times nearly the whole of the clothing was made of
wool, especially the most valuable part of it, namely the large
mantle, or "haick," in which the whole person could be folded, and
which was the usual covering during sleep. The wool, therefore,
would be an article of great national value; and so we find that
when the king of Moab paid his tribute in kind to the king of
Israel, it was carefully specified that the Sheep should not be
shorn. "And Mesha king of Moab was a sheep-master, and rendered
unto the king of Israel an hundred thousand lambs, and an hundred
thousand rams, with the wool."
The wool of the Sheep of Palestine differed extremely in value; some
kinds being coarse and rough, while others were fine.
The wool was dressed in those times much as it is at present, being
carded and then spun with the spindle, the distaff being apparently
unused, and the wool simply drawn out by the hand. The shape of the
spindle was much like that of the well-known flat spinning-tops that
come from Japan--namely, a disc through which passes an axle. A
smart twirl given by the fingers to the axle makes the disc revolve
very rapidly, and its weight causes the rotation to continue for a
considerable time. Spinning the wool was exclusively the task of the
women, a custom which prevailed in this country up to a very recent
time, and which still traditionally survives in the term "spinster,"
and in the metaphorical use of the word "distaff" as synonymous with
a woman's proper work.
When spun into threads, the wool was woven in the simple loom
which has existed up to our own day, and which is identical in its
general principles throughout a very large portion of the world. It
consisted of a framework of wood, at one end of which was placed the
"beam" to which the warp was attached; and at the other end was the
"pin" on which the cloth was rolled as it was finished.
The reader may remember that when Delilah was cajoling Samson to
tell her the secret of his strength, he said, "If thou weavest the
seven locks of my head with the web." So, as he slept, she interwove
his long hair with the fabric which was on her loom, and, to make
sure, "fastened it with the pin," _i.e._ wove it completely into the
cloth which was rolled round the pin. So firmly had she done so,
that when he awoke he could not disentangle his hair, but left the
house with the whole of the loom, the beam and the pin, and the web
hanging to his head.
* * * * *
Wool was often dyed of various colours; blue, purple, and scarlet
being those which were generally employed. The rams' skins which
formed part of the covering of the Tabernacle were ordered to be
dyed scarlet, partly on account of the significance of the colour,
and partly because none but the best and purest fleeces would be
chosen for so rare and costly a dye. How the colour was produced we
shall learn towards the end of the volume.
Sheep-shearing was always a time of great rejoicing and revelry,
which seem often to have been carried beyond the bounds of
sobriety. Thus when Nabal had gathered together his three thousand
Sheep in Carmel, and held a shearing festival, David sent to ask for
some provisions for his band, and was refused in accordance with
the disposition of the man, who had inflamed his naturally churlish
nature with wine. "He held a feast in his house, like the feast of
a king: and Nabal's heart was merry within him, for he was very
drunken" (1 Sam. xxv. 36).
The same was probably the case when Laban was shearing his Sheep
(Gen. xxxi. 19). Otherwise it would scarcely have been possible for
Jacob to have gone away unknown to Laban, taking with him his wives
and children, his servants, his camels, and his flocks, the rapid
increase of which had excited the jealousy of his uncle, and which
were so numerous that, in fear of his brother Esau, he divided them
into two bands, and yet was able to select from them a present to
his brother, consisting in all of nearly six hundred sheep, camels,
oxen, goats, and asses.
Sometimes the shepherds and others who lived in pastoral districts
made themselves coats of the skins of the Sheep, with the wool still
adhering to it. The custom extends to the present day, and even
in many parts of Europe the sheep-skin dress of the shepherds is
a familiar sight to the traveller. The skin was sometimes tanned
and used as leather, but was considered as inferior to that of the
goat. Mr. Tristram conjectures that the leathern "girdle" worn by
St. John the Baptist was probably the untanned sheep-skin coat which
has been just mentioned. So it is said of the early Christians, that
"they wandered about in sheep-skins and goat-skins, being destitute,
afflicted, tormented," the sheep-skins in question being evidently
the rude shepherd's coats.
* * * * *
The horn of the ram had a national value, as from it were made the
sacred trumpets which played so important a part in the history of
the Jewish nation. There is no doubt that the primitive trumpets
were originally formed either from the horn of an animal, such as
the ox, the large-horned antelopes, the sheep, and the goat, and
that in process of time they were made of metal, generally copper or
silver.
References are frequently made in the Bible to these trumpets, for
which there were different names, probably on account of their
different forms. These names are, however, very loosely rendered in
our version, the same word being sometimes translated the "cornet,"
and sometimes the "trumpet."
[Illustration: SOUNDING THE TRUMPETS IN THE YEAR OF JUBILEE.]
The jubilee year was always ushered in by the blasts of the sacred
trumpets. "Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubilee to sound
on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall
ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land" (Lev. xxv. 9).
Then there was the festival known as the Feast of Trumpets. "In the
seventh month, on the first day of the month, ye shall have an holy
convocation; ye shall do no servile work: it is a day of blowing the
trumpets unto you" (Numb. xxix. 1).
One of these trumpets is now before me, and is shown in the
accompanying illustration.
In length it measures eighteen inches, _i.e._ a cubit, and it is
formed entirely in one piece. As far as I can judge, it is made from
the left horn of the broad-tailed Sheep, which, as has already been
remarked, is not spiral, but flattish, curved backwards, and forming
nearly a circle, the point passing under the ear. This structure,
added to the large size of the horn, adapts it well for its purpose.
In order to bring it to the proper shape, the horn is softened by
heat, and is then modelled into the very form which was used by the
Jewish priests who blew the trumpet before the ark.
[Illustration: RAM'S HORN TRUMPET.]
At the present day one such trumpet, at least, is found in every
Jewish community, and is kept by the man who has the privilege of
blowing it.
* * * * *
We now come to the important subject, the use of the Sheep in
sacrifice.
No animal was used so frequently for this purpose as the Sheep, and
in many passages of the Mosaic law are specified the precise age as
well as the sex of the Sheep which was to be sacrificed in certain
circumstances. Sometimes the Sheep was sacrificed as an offering
of thanksgiving, sometimes as an expiation for sin, and sometimes
as a redemption for some more valuable animal. The young male lamb
was the usual sacrifice; and almost the only sacrifice for which a
Sheep might not be offered was that of the two goats on the great
Day of Atonement.
[Illustration: A LAMB UPON THE ALTAR OF BURNT OFFERING.]
To mention all the passages in which the Sheep is ordered for
sacrifice would occupy too much of our space, and we will therefore
restrict ourselves to the one central rite of the Jewish nation, the
sacrifice of the Paschal lamb, the precursor of the Lamb of God, who
taketh away the sins of the world.
Without examining in full the various ceremonies of the Paschal
sacrifice, we will glance over the salient points which distinguish
it from any other sacrifice.
The lamb must be a male, which is selected and examined with the
minutest care, that it may be free from all blemish, and must be of
the first year. It must be killed on the fourteenth of the month
Abib as the sun is setting, and the blood must be sprinkled with
hyssop. In the first or Egyptian Passover the blood was sprinkled
on the lintels and doorposts of the houses, but afterwards on the
altar. It must be roasted with fire, and not boiled, after the usual
custom in the East; not a bone must be broken. It must be eaten by
the household in haste, as if they were just starting on a journey,
and if any of it should be left, it must be consumed in the fire,
and not eaten on the following day.
Such are the chief points in connexion with the Paschal rite, at
once a sacrifice and a feast. The original directions not being
sufficiently minute to meet all the practical difficulties which
might hinder the correct performance of the rite, a vast number
of directions are given by the Rabbinical writers. In order, for
example, to guard against the destruction of any part of the animal
by careless cooking over a fire, or the possible fracture of a bone
by a sudden jet of flame, the Paschal lamb was rather baked than
roasted, being placed in an earthen oven from which the ashes had
been removed. In order to prevent it from being burned or blackened
against the sides of the oven, (in which case it would be cooked
with earthenware and not with fire), it was transfixed with a wooden
stake, made from the pomegranate-tree, and a transverse spit was
thrust through the shoulders. These spits were made of wood, because
a metal spit would become heated in the oven, and would cause all
the flesh which it touched to be roasted with metal, and not with
fire; and the wood of the pomegranate was chosen, because that wood
was supposed not to emit any sap when heated. If a drop of water had
fallen on the flesh, the law would have been broken, as that part of
the flesh would be considered as boiled, and not roasted.
As to the eating of unleavened bread and bitter herbs with the lamb,
the custom does not bear on the present subject. In shape the oven
seems to have resembled a straw beehive, having an opening at the
side by which the fuel could be removed and the lamb inserted.
The ceremony of the Passover has been described by several persons,
such as the late Consul Rogers and the Dean of Westminster, the
latter of whom has given, a most striking and vivid account of the
rite in his "Lectures on the Jewish Church."
The place which is now employed in the celebration of this rite
is a level spot about two hundred yards from the summit of the
mountain, a place which is apparently selected on account of its
comparative quiet and seclusion. Dean Stanley thinks that in former
times, when the Samaritans were the masters of the country, they
celebrated the sacrifice on the sacred plateau on the very summit of
the mountain, so that the rite could be seen for a vast distance on
every side. Now, however, the less conspicuous place is preferred.
By the kindness of the Palestine Exploration Society, I am enabled
to present the reader with a view of this sacred spot, taken from
a photograph made an hour or two before the time of sacrifice.
The rough, rugged character of the mountain is shown by this
illustration, though not so well as in several other photographs of
Gerizim, in which the entire surface seems to be loosely covered
with stones like those of which the low wall is built. Near the
centre of the illustration may be seen a pile of sticks and the tops
of two caldrons, on each of which a stone is laid to keep the cover
from being blown off by the wind. These sticks nearly fill a trench
in which the caldrons are sunk, and their use will be presently seen
on reading Dean Stanley's narrative. In the far distance are the
plains of Samaria, and the long-drawn shadows of the priest and his
nephew, and probable successor, show that the time of sacrifice is
rapidly approaching.
[Illustration: THE PLACE OF SACRIFICE.]
On the previous day the whole of the community had pitched their
tents on the mountain, and as the time of sunset approached the
women retired to the tents, and all the males, except those who were
unclean according to the provisions of the Mosaic law, assembled
near a long deep trench that had been dug in the ground. The men
are clothed in long white garments, and the six young men who are
selected as the actual sacrifices are dressed in white drawers and
shirts. These youths are trained to the duty, but whether they hold
any sacred office could not be ascertained.
Then, according to the narrative of Dean Stanley, "the priest,
ascending a large rough stone in front of the congregation, recited
in a loud chant or scream, in which the others joined, prayers or
praises chiefly turning on the glories of Abraham and Isaac. Their
attitude was that of all Orientals in prayer; standing, occasionally
diversified by the stretching out of the hands, and more rarely by
kneeling or crouching, with their knees wrapped in their clothes and
bent to the ground, towards the Holy Place on the summit of Gerizim.
The priest recited his prayers by heart; the others had mostly books
in Hebrew and Arabic.
"Presently, suddenly there appeared amongst the worshippers six
sheep, driven up by the side of the youths before mentioned. The
unconscious innocence with which they wandered to and fro amongst
the bystanders, and the simplicity in aspect and manner of the young
men who tended them, more recalled a pastoral scene in Arcadia, or
one of those inimitable patriarchal _tableaux_ represented in the
Ammergau Mystery, than a religious ceremonial.
"The sun, meanwhile, which had hitherto burnished up the
Mediterranean in the distance, now sank very nearly to the farthest
western ridge overhanging the plain of Sharon. The recitation became
more vehement. The priest turned about, facing his brethren, and
the whole history of the Exodus from the beginning of the plagues
of Egypt was rapidly, almost furiously, chanted. The sheep, still
innocently playful, were driven more closely together.
"The setting sun now touched the ridge. The youths burst into a
wild murmur of their own, drew forth their long bright knives, and
brandished them aloft. In a moment the sheep were thrown on their
backs, and the flashing knives rapidly drawn across their throats.
Then a few convulsive but silent struggles--'as a sheep ... dumb ...
that openeth not his mouth,'--and the six forms lay lifeless on the
ground, the blood streaming from them; the one only Jewish sacrifice
lingering in the world. In the blood the young men dipped their
fingers, and a small spot was marked on the foreheads and noses of
the children. A few years ago the red stain was placed on all. But
this had now dwindled away into the present practice, preserved,
we were told, as a relic or emblem of the whole. Then, as if in
congratulation at the completion of the ceremony, they all kissed
each other, in the Oriental fashion, on each side of the head.
"The next process was that of the fleecing and roasting of the
slaughtered animals, for which the ancient temple furnished such
ample provisions. Two holes on the mountain side had been dug;
one at some distance, of considerable depth, the other, close to
the scene of the sacrifice, comparatively shallow. In this latter
cavity, after a short prayer, a fire was kindled, out of the mass of
dry heath, juniper, and briers, such as furnished the materials for
the conflagration in Jotham's parable, delivered not far from this
spot.
"Over the fire were placed two caldrons full of water. Whilst the
water boiled, the congregation again stood around, and (as if for
economy of time) continued the recitation of the Book of Exodus,
and bitter herbs were handed round wrapped in a strip of unleavened
bread--'with unleavened bread and bitter herbs shall they eat
it.' Then was chanted another short prayer; after which the six
youths again appeared, poured the boiling water over the sheep, and
plucked off their fleeces. The right forelegs of the sheep, with the
entrails, were thrown aside and burnt. The liver was carefully put
back. Long poles were brought, on which the animals were spitted;
near the bottom of each pole was a transverse peg or stick, to
prevent the body from slipping off."
This cross-piece does not, however, penetrate the body, which in
most cases scarcely touches it, so that there is little or no
resemblance to a crucifixion. The writer lays especial stress on
this point, because the early Christians saw in the transverse spit
an emblem of the cross. In the Jewish Passover this emblem would
have been more appropriate, as in that ceremony the cross-piece was
passed through the shoulders, and the forefeet tied to it.
The Sheep being now prepared, they were carried to the oven, which
on this occasion was a deep, circular pit, in which a fire had been
previously kindled. Into this the victims were carefully lowered,
the stakes on which they were impaled guarding their bodies from
touching the sides of the oven, and the cross-piece at the end
preventing them from slipping off the stake to the bottom of the pit
among the ashes. A hurdle was then laid on the mouth of the pit,
and wet earth was heaped upon it so as to close it completely. The
greater part of the community then retired to rest. In about five
hours, the Paschal moon being high in the heavens, announcement
was made that the feast was about to begin. Then, to resume Dean
Stanley's narrative,
"Suddenly the covering of the hole was torn off, and up rose into
the still moonlit sky a vast column of smoke and steam; recalling,
with a shock of surprise, that, even by an accidental coincidence,
Reginald Heber should have so well caught this striking feature of
so remote and unknown a ritual:
'Smokes on Gerizim's mount Samaria's sacrifice.'
"Out of the pit were dragged successively the six sheep, on their
long spits, black from the oven. The outlines of their heads, their
ears, their legs, were still visible--'his head, with his legs, and
with the inward parts thereof.' They were hoisted aloft, and then
thrown on large square brown mats, previously prepared for their
reception, on which we were carefully prevented from treading, as
also from touching even the extremities of the spit.
"The bodies thus wrapped in the mats were hurried down to the trench
where the sacrifice had taken place, and laid out upon them in a
line between two files of the Samaritans. Those who had before been
dressed in white robes still retained them, with the addition now
of shoes on their feet and staves in their hands, and ropes round
their waists--'thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your
shoes on your feet, your staff in your hand.' The recitation of
prayers or of the Pentateuch recommenced, and continued till it
suddenly terminated in their all sitting down on their haunches,
after the Arab fashion at meals, and beginning to eat. This, too,
is a deviation from the practice of only a few years since, when
they retained the Mosaic ritual of standing whilst they ate. The
actual feast was conducted in rapid silence, as of men in hunger, as
no doubt most of them were, and so as soon to consume every portion
of the blackened masses, which they tore away piecemeal with their
fingers--'ye shall eat in haste.' There was a general merriment, as
of a hearty and welcome meal.
"In ten minutes all was gone but a few remnants. To the priest and
to the women, who, all but two (probably his two wives), remained
in the tents, separate morsels were carried round. The remnants
were gathered into the mats, and put on a wooden grate, or hurdle,
over the hole where the water had been originally boiled; the fire
was again lit, and a huge bonfire was kindled. By its blaze, and by
candles lighted for the purpose, the ground was searched in every
direction, as for the consecrated particles of sacramental elements;
and these fragments of flesh and bone were thrown upon the burning
mass--'ye shall let nothing remain until the morning; and that which
remaineth until the morning ye shall burn with fire;' 'there shall
not anything of the flesh which thou sacrificest the first day at
even remain all night until the morning;' 'thou shalt not carry
forth aught of the flesh abroad out of the house.' The flames blazed
up once more, and then gradually sank away.
[Illustration: sheep]
"Perhaps in another century the fire on Mount Gerizim will be the
only relic left of this most interesting and ancient rite."
[Illustration: chamois]
THE CHAMOIS.
The Zemer or Chamois only once mentioned in the
Bible--Signification of the word Zemer--Probability that the
Zemer is the Aoudad--Its strength and activity--The Mouflon
probably classed with the Aoudad under the name of Zemer.
Among the animals which may be used for food is mentioned one which
in our version is rendered Chamois. See Deut. xiv. 5, a passage
which has several times been quoted.
It is evident to any one acquainted with zoology that, whatever
may be the Hebrew word, "Chamois" cannot be the correct rendering,
inasmuch as this animal does not inhabit Palestine, nor are there
any proofs that it ever did so. The Chamois frequents the lofty
inaccessible crags of the highest mountains, finding its food in the
scanty herbage which grows in such regions, appearing on the brink
of awful precipices, and leaping from ledge to ledge with ease and
safety. We must, therefore, look for some other animal.
The Chamois is one of the most wary of Antelopes, and possesses the
power of scenting mankind at what would seem to be an impossible
distance.
Its ears are as acute as its nostrils, so that there are few animals
which are so difficult to approach.
Only those who have been trained to climb the giddy heights of the
Alpine Mountains, to traverse the most fearful precipices with a
quiet pulse and steady head, to exist for days amid the terrible
solitudes of ice, rock, and snow,--only these, can hope to come
within sight of the Chamois, when the animal is at large upon its
native cliffs.
The Hebrew word, which has been rendered Chamois, is Zamar, or
Zemer, _i. e._ the leaper, and therefore an animal which is
conspicuous for its agility. Zoologists have now agreed in the
opinion that the Zamer of Deuteronomy is the handsome wild sheep
which we know under the name of Aoudad (_Ammotragus Tragelaphus_).
This splendid sheep is known by various names. It is the Jaela of
some authors, and the Bearded Sheep of others. It is also called the
Fichtall, or Lerwea; and the French zoologists describe it under the
name of _Mouflon à manchettes_, in allusion to the fringe of long
hair that ornaments the fore limbs.
The Aoudad is a large and powerful animal, exceedingly active,
and has the habits of the goat rather than of the sheep, on which
account it is reckoned among the goats by the Arabs of the present
day, and doubtless was similarly classed by the ancient inhabitants
of Palestine. The height of the adult Aoudad is about three feet,
and its general colour is pale dun, relieved by the dark masses of
long hair that fall from the neck and the tufts of similar hair
which decorate the knees of the male. The female is also bearded and
tufted, but the hair, which in the male looks like the mane of the
lion, in the female is but slightly developed.
It is so powerful and active an animal, that an adult male which
lived for some time in the Zoological Gardens was much dreaded
by the keepers, not even the man who fed it liking to enter the
enclosure if he could help himself. The animal was given to making
unexpected charges, and would do so with astonishing quickness,
springing round and leaping at the object of his hate with
tremendous force, and with such rapidity that even the experienced
keeper, who knew all the ways of the animals under his charge, had
often some difficulty in slipping behind the door, against which the
horns of the Aoudad would clatter as if they would break the door to
pieces. So fond was he of attacking something that he would often
butt repeatedly at the wooden side of the shed, hurling himself
against it with eager fury.
[Illustration: CHAMOIS DEFENDING ITS YOUNG.]
[Illustration: CHASING THE AOUDAD.]
The horns of the Aoudad are about two feet in length, and are of
considerable diameter. They curve boldly and gracefully backwards,
their points diverging considerably from each other, so that when
the animal throws its head up, the points of the horns come on
either side of the back. This divergence of the horns has another
object. They cover a considerable space, so that when the animal
makes its charge the object of its anger has much more difficulty in
escaping the blow than if the horns were closer together.
Whether these horns were used as musical instruments is doubtful,
simply because we are not absolutely sure that the Zamar and the
Aoudad are identical, however great may be the probability. But
inasmuch as the horn-trumpets were evidently of various sizes, it
is certain that the Jewish musicians would never have neglected to
take advantage of such magnificent materials as they would obtain
from the horns of this animal. Perhaps the Chaldaic "keren" may have
been the horn of the Aoudad, or of the animal which will next be
mentioned.
The Aoudad is wonderfully active, and even the young ones bound to
an astonishing height. I have seen the marks of their hoofs eight
feet from the ground.
In its wild state the Aoudad lives in little flocks or herds,
and prefers the high and rocky ground, over which it leaps with
a sure-footed agility equal to that of the Chamois itself. These
flocks are chased by hunters, who try to get it upon the lowest and
least broken ground, where it is at a disadvantage, and then run it
down with their horses, as seen in the illustration on page 214.
The Aoudad was formerly plentiful in Egypt, and even now is
found along the Atlas mountain-range. It is seen on the Egyptian
monuments, and, owing to its evident profusion, we have every reason
to conjecture that it was one of those animals which were specially
indicated as chewing the cud and cleaving the hoof.
* * * * *
Perhaps the MOUFLON (_Caprovis Musimon_) may be the animal which is
meant by the Hebrew word Zamar, and it is not unlikely that both
animals may have been included in one name.
This animal, which is nearly allied to the Aoudad, is also very
goatlike in general aspect. It is indeed to this resemblance that
the name Caprovis, or goat-sheep, has been given to it. The name
Ammotragus, which, as mentioned above, belongs to the Aoudad, has a
similar signification.
The horns of the Mouflon belong only to the male animal, and are
of enormous size, so that if trumpets of deep tone and great power
were needed, they could be obtained from the horns of this animal.
Those of the Aoudad are very large, and would be well adapted for
the same purpose, but they would not furnish such instruments as
the horns of the Mouflon, which are so large that they seem almost
unwieldy for an animal of twice the Mouflon's size, and give visible
proofs of the strength and agility of an animal which can carry them
so lightly and leap about under their weight so easily as does the
Mouflon.
[Illustration: THE MOUFLON.]
At the present time the Mouflon is only to be found in Crete,
Sardinia, and Corsica, but formerly it was known to inhabit many
other parts of the earth, and was almost certainly one of the many
animals which then haunted the Lebanon, but which have in later days
been extirpated.
THE GOAT.
Value of the Goat--Its use in furnishing food--The male kid the
usual animal of slaughter--Excellence of the flesh and deception
of Isaac--Milk of the Goat--An Oriental milking scene--The hair
of the goat, and the uses to which it is put--The Goat's skin
used for leather--The "bottle" of Scripture--Mode of making
and repairing the bottles--Ruse of the Gibeonites--The "bottle
in the smoke"--The sacks and the kneading troughs--The Goat as
used for sacrifice--General habits of the Goat--Separation of
the Goats from the sheep--Performing Goats--Different breeds of
Goats in Palestine.
Whether considered in reference to food, to clothing, or to
sacrifice, the GOAT was scarcely a less important animal than the
sheep. It was especially valuable in such a country as Palestine,
in which the soil and the climate vary so much according to the
locality. Upon the large fertile plains the sheep are bred in vast
flocks, the rich and succulent grass being exactly to their taste;
while in the hilly and craggy districts the Goats abound, and
delight in browsing upon the scanty herbage that grows upon the
mountain-side.
For food the Goat was even more extensively used than the sheep.
The adult male was, of course, not eaten, being very tough, and
having an odour which would repel any but an actually starving man.
Neither were the females generally eaten, as they were needed for
the future increase of the flocks. The young male kid formed the
principal material of a feast, and as soon as a stranger claimed the
hospitality of a man in good circumstances, the first thing that was
done was to take a young male kid and dress it for him.
For example, when the angel visited Gideon in the guise of a
stranger, Gideon "went in and made ready a kid, and unleavened cakes
of an ephah of flour," and brought them to his guest (Judges vi.
19). And when Isaac was on his death-bed and asked Esau to take
his bow and arrows and hunt for "venison," which was probably the
flesh of one of the antelopes which have already been mentioned, a
ready substitute was found in the two kids, from whose flesh Rebekah
made the dish for which he longed. The imposition might easily
pass without detection, because the flesh of the kid is peculiarly
tender, and can scarcely be distinguished from lamb, even when
simply roasted. Isaac, therefore, with his senses dulled by his
great age, was the less likely to discover the imposture, when the
flesh of the kids was stewed into "savoury meat such as he loved."
[Illustration: JACOB DECEIVES HIS FATHER AND TAKES ESAU'S BLESSING.]
A curious illustration of the prevalence of kid's flesh as food is
given in the parable of the prodigal son, for whom his father had
killed the fatted calf. "And he answering said to his father, Lo,
these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any
time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I
might make merry with my friends" (Luke xv. 29). The force of the
reproval cannot be properly understood unless we are acquainted with
the customs of the East. The kid was the least valuable animal that
could have been given, less valuable than a lamb, and infinitely
inferior to the fatted calf, which was kept in wealthy households
for some feast of more than ordinary magnificence.
The kid was cooked exactly in the same manner as the sheep, namely,
by cutting to pieces and stewing in a caldron, the meat and broth
being served separately. See, for example, the case of Gideon, to
whom a reference has already been made. When he brought the banquet
to his guest, "the flesh he put in a basket, and he put the broth
in a pot, and brought it out unto him under the oak, and presented
it. And the angel of God said unto him, Take the flesh and the
unleavened cakes, and lay them upon this rock, and pour out the
broth."
[Illustration: THE ANGEL APPEARS TO GIDEON.]
Gideon did so, and the angel reached forth the staff that was in his
hand, and touched the flesh, and there rose up fire out of the rock
and burnt up the offering.
The same custom exists at the present day. When an Arab chief
receives a guest, a kid is immediately killed and given to the
women to be cooked, and the guest is pressed to stay until it is
ready, in the very words used by Gideon three thousand years ago.
"Depart not hence, I pray thee, until I come unto thee, and bring
forth my present, and set it before thee." The refusal of proffered
hospitality would be, and still is considered to be, either a
studied insult, or a proof of bad manners, and no one with any
claims to breeding would commit such an action without urgent cause
and much apology.
Like the sheep, the Goat is extremely valuable as a milk-producer,
and at the present day the milk of the Goat is used as largely as
that of the sheep. "At Rasheiya, under Mount Hermon," writes Mr.
Tristram, "we saw some hundreds of goats gathering for the night
in the wide open market-place beneath the castle. It was no easy
matter to thread our way among them, as they had no idea of moving
for such belated intruders on their rest. All the she-goats of the
neighbouring hills are driven in every evening, and remain for
their morning's milking, after which they set forth on their day's
excursion.
"Each house possesses several, and all know their owners. The
evening milking is a picturesque scene. Every street and open space
is filled with the goats; and women, boys, and girls are everywhere
milking with their small pewter pots, while the goats are anxiously
awaiting their turn, or lying down to chew the cud as soon as it
is over. As no kids or he-goats are admitted, the scene is very
orderly, and there is none of the deafening bleating which usually
characterises large flocks.
"These mountain goats are a solemn set, and by the gravity of their
demeanour excite a suspicion that they have had no youth, and never
were kids. They need no herdsman to bring them home in the evening,
for, fully sensible of the danger of remaining unprotected, they
hurry homewards of their own accord as soon as the sun begins to
decline."
* * * * *
Like the wool of the sheep, the hair of the Goat is used for the
manufacture of clothing; and, as is the case with wool, its quality
differs according to the particular breed of the animal, which
assumes almost as many varieties as the sheep or the dog. The hair
of some varieties is thick and rough, and can only be made into
coarse cloths, while others, of which the mohair Goat and Cashmere
Goat are familiar examples, furnish a staple of surpassing delicacy
and fineness. It is most likely that the covering and curtains of
the Tabernacle mentioned in Exod. xxvi. 7 were of the latter kind,
as otherwise they would have been out of character with the fine
linen, and blue and scarlet, their golden clasps, and the profuse
magnificence which distinguished every part of the sacred building.
Moreover, the hair of the Goat is classed among the costly offerings
which were made when the Tabernacle was built. "And they came
forth, men and women, as many as were willing hearted, and brought
bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of
gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of gold unto
the Lord. And every man, with whom was found blue, and purple, and
scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, and red skins of rams, and
badgers' skins, brought them" to be used in the structure of that
wonderful building, in which nothing might be used except the finest
and costliest that could be procured.
One of the principal uses to which the goat-skin was applied was
the manufacture of leather, for which purpose it is still used,
and is considered far better than that of the sheep. Perhaps the
most common form in which this leather is used is the well-known
water-vessel, or "bottle" of the Bible.
These so-called bottles are made from the entire skin of the animal,
which is prepared in slightly different methods according to the
locality in which the manufacture is carried on. In Palestine they
are soaked for some little time in the tanning mixture, and are
then filled with water, after the seams have been pitched. In this
state they are kept for some time, and are kept exposed to the sun,
covered entirely with the tanning fluid, and filled up with water to
supply the loss caused by evaporation and leakage.
The hair is allowed to remain on the skins, because it acts as a
preservative against the rough usage to which they are subject at
the hard hands of the water-carriers. By degrees the hairy covering
wears off, first in patches, and then over the entire surface, so
that a new bottle can be recognised at a glance, and any one who
wished to sell an old bottle at the price of a new one would be at
once detected.
Vessels made in this rude manner are absolutely necessary in the
countries wherein they are used. Wooden or metal vessels would be
too heavy, and, besides, the slight though constant evaporation
that always takes place through the pores of the leather keeps
down the temperature of the water, even under a burning sun, the
slight loss which is caused by the porousness of the skin being
more than counterbalanced by the coolness of the water. It is true
that the goat-skin communicates to the liquid a flavour far from
pleasant, but in those countries the quality of the water is of
little consequence, provided that it is plentiful in quantity, and
tolerably cool.
In all parts of the world where the skin is used for this purpose
the mode of manufacture is practically identical. An account of the
art of preparing the goat-skin as practised in Abyssinia is given by
Mr. C. Johnston, in his "Travels in Southern Abyssinia:"--
"To be of any value it must be taken off uncut, except around the
neck, and in those situations necessary to enable the butchers to
draw the legs out of the skin; also, of course, where the first
incision is made to commence the process, and which is a circular
cut carried around both haunches, not many inches from and having
the tail for a centre. The hide is then stripped over the thighs,
and two smaller incisions being made round the middle joint of the
hind-legs enable them to be drawn out.
"A stick is now placed to extend these extremities, and by this, for
the convenience of the operators, the whole carcase is suspended
from the branch of a tree, and, by some easy pulls around the body,
the skin is gradually withdrawn over the fore-legs, which are
incised around the knees, to admit of their being taken out; after
which, the head being removed, the whole business concludes by the
skin being pulled inside out over the decollated neck. One of the
parties now takes a rough stone and well rubs the inside surface,
to divest it of a few fibres of the subcutaneous muscle which are
inserted into the skin, and after this operation it is laid aside
until the next day; the more interesting business of attending to
the meat calling for immediate attention.
"These entire skins are afterwards made into sacks by the apertures
around the neck and legs being secured by a double fold of the
skin being sewed upon each other, by means of a slender but very
tough thong. These small seams are rendered quite air-tight, and
the larger orifice around the haunches being gathered together by
the hands, the yet raw skin is distended with air; and the orifice
being then tied up, the swollen bag is left in that state for a few
days, until slight putrefaction has commenced, when the application
of the rough stone soon divests its surface of the hair. After
this has been effected, a deal of labour, during at least one
day, is required to soften the distended skin by beating it with
heavy sticks, or trampling upon it for hours together, the labourer
supporting himself by clinging to the bough of a tree overhead, or
holding on by the wall of the house.
"In this manner, whilst the skin is drying, it is prevented from
getting stiff, and, still further to secure it from this evil
condition, it is frequently rubbed with small quantities of butter.
When it is supposed that there is no chance of the skin becoming
hard and easily broken, the orifice is opened, the air escapes, and
a very soft, flaccid leather bag is produced, but which, for several
days after, affords an amusement to the owner, when otherwise
unemployed, by well rubbing it all over with his hands."
The reader will see that the two processes are practically
identical, the chief difference being that in one country the skins
are distended with water and in the other with air.
As these bottles are rather apt to be damaged by the thorns,
branches, rocks, and similar objects with which they come in
contact, and are much too valuable to be thrown away as useless,
their owners have discovered methods of patching and repairing
them, which enable them to be used for some time longer. Patches of
considerable size are sometimes inserted, if the rent should be of
importance, while the wound caused by a thorn is mended by a simple
and efficacious expedient. The skin is first emptied, and a round
flat piece of wood, or even a stone of suitable shape, is put into
it. The skin is then held with the wounded part downwards, and the
stone shaken about until it comes exactly upon the hole. It is then
grasped, the still wet hide gathered tightly under it, so as to
pucker up the skin, and a ligature is tied firmly round it. Perhaps
some of my readers may have practised the same method of mending a
punctured football.
Allusion to this mode of mending the skin bottles is made in Josh.
ix. 4, 13. The Gibeonites "did work wilily, and went and made as if
they had been ambassadors, and took old sacks upon their asses, and
wine bottles, old, and rent, and bound up ... and said ... these
bottles of wine, which we filled, were new; and, behold, they be
rent."
If these skin bottles be allowed to become dry, as is sometimes the
case when they are hung up in the smoky tents, they shrivel up,
and become rotten and weak, and are no longer enabled to bear the
pressure caused by the fermentation of new wine. So, in Ps. cxix.
81-83: "My soul fainteth for Thy salvation: but I hope in Thy word.
[Illustration: EASTERN WATER-CARRIERS WITH BOTTLES MADE OF
GOAT-SKIN.]
"Mine eyes fail for Thy word, saying, When wilt Thou comfort me?
"For I am become like a bottle in the smoke; yet do I not forget Thy
statutes."
How forcible does not this image become, when we realize the early
life of the shepherd poet, his dwelling in tents wherein are no
windows nor chimneys, and in which the smoke rolls to and fro until
it settles in the form of soot upon the leathern bottles and other
rude articles of furniture that are hung from the poles!
In the New Testament there is a well-known allusion to the weakness
of old bottles: "Neither do men put new wine into old bottles, or
the bottles break and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish;
but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved." It
would be impossible to understand the meaning of this passage unless
we knew that the "bottles" in question were not vessels of glass or
earthenware, but merely the partly-tanned skins of goats.
Another allusion to the use of the goat-skin is made in that part of
the Book of Joshua which has already been mentioned. If the reader
will refer to Josh. ix. 4, he will see that the Gibeonites took with
them not only old bottles, but old sacks. Now, these sacks bore no
resemblance to the hempen bags with which we are so familiar, but
were nothing more than the same goat-skins that were employed in
the manufacture of bottles, but with the opening at the neck left
open. They were, in fact, skin-bottles for holding solids instead of
liquids. The sacks which Joseph's brethren took with them, and in
the mouths of which they found their money, were simply goat-skin
bags, made as described.
Yet another use for the goat-skin. It is almost certain that the
"kneading-troughs" of the ancient Israelites were simply circular
pieces of goat-skin, which could be laid on the ground when wanted,
and rolled up and carried away when out of use. Thus, the fact
that "the people took their dough before it was leavened, their
kneading-troughs being bound up in their clothing upon their
shoulders," need cause no surprise.
Nothing could be more in accordance with probability. The women were
all hard at work, preparing the bread for the expected journey, when
the terrified Pharaoh "called for Moses and Aaron by night, and
said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and
the children of Israel, and go, serve the Lord, as ye have said....
And the Egyptians were urgent upon the people that they might send
them out of the land in haste; for they said, We be all dead men."
So the women, being disturbed at their work, and being driven
out of the country before they had leavened, much less baked,
their bread, had no alternative but to roll up the dough in the
leathern "kneading-troughs," tie them up in a bundle with their
spare clothing, and carry them on their shoulders; whereas, if we
connect the kneading-troughs with the large heavy wooden implements
used in this country, we shall form an entirely erroneous idea of
the proceeding. As soon as they came to their first halting-place
at Succoth, they took the leathern kneading-troughs out of their
clothes, unrolled them, took the dough which had not even been
leavened, so unexpectedly had the order for marching arrived, made
it into flat cakes, and baked them as they best could. The same kind
of "kneading-trough" is still in use in many parts of the world.
Stone as well as earthenware jars were also used by the inhabitants
of ancient Palestine; but they were only employed for the storage of
wine in houses, whereas the bottles that were used in carrying wine
from one place to another were invariably made of leather. Water
also was stored in stone or earthenware jars. See, for example,
John ii. 6: "And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after
the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three
firkins apiece." Whereas, when it was carried about, it was poured
into bottles made of skin. Such was probably the "bottle of water"
that Abraham put on Hagar's shoulder, when she was driven away by
the jealousy of Sarah, and such was the "bottle of wine" that Hannah
brought as her offering when she dedicated Samuel to the service of
God.
In sacrifices the Goat was in nearly as much requisition as the
lamb, and in one--namely, that which was celebrated on the Great Day
of Atonement--the Goat was specially mentioned as the only animal
which could be sacrificed. The reader will, perhaps, remember that
for this peculiar sacrifice two Goats were required, on which two
lots were cast, one for the Lord, _i.e._ with the word "Jehovah"
upon it, and the other for the scapegoat, _i.e._ inscribed with the
word "Azazel." The latter term is derived from two Hebrew words,
the former being "Az," which is the general name for the Goat, and
the second "azel," signifying "he departed." The former, which
belonged to Jehovah, was sacrificed, and its blood sprinkled upon
the mercy-seat and the altar of incense; and the Goat Azazel was
led away into the wilderness, bearing upon its head the sins of the
people, and there let loose.
* * * * *
These being the uses of the Goat, it may naturally be imagined that
the animal is one of extreme importance, and that it is watched as
carefully by its owners as the sheep. Indeed, both sheep and Goats
belong to the same master, and are tended by the same shepherd, who
exercises the same sway over them that he does over the sheep.
They are, however, erratic animals, and, although they will follow
the shepherd wherever he may lead them, they will not mix with the
sheep. The latter will walk in a compact flock along the valley, the
shepherd leading the way, and the sheep following him, led in their
turn by the sound of the bell tied round the neck of the master-ram
of the flock. The Goats, however, will not submit to walk in so
quiet a manner, but prefer to climb along the sides of the rocks
that skirt the valleys, skipping and jumping as they go, and seeming
to take delight in getting themselves into dangerous places, where a
man could not venture to set his foot.
In the evening, when the shepherds call their flocks to repose,
they often make use of the caverns which exist at some height in
the precipitous side of the hills, as being safe strongholds, where
the jackal and the hyæna will not venture to attack them. When such
is the case, the shepherds take their station by the mouth of the
cave, and assist the sheep as they come sedately up the narrow path
that leads to the cavern. The Goats, however, need no assistance,
but come scrambling along by paths where no foot but a Goat's could
tread, mostly descending from a considerable height above the cave,
and, as if in exultation at their superior agility, jumping over the
backs of the sheep as they slowly file into the accustomed fold.
Friendly as they are, the Goats and sheep never mingle together.
There may be large flocks of them feeding in the same pasturage,
but the Goats always take the highest spots on which verdure grows,
while the sheep graze quietly below. Goats are specially fond of the
tender shoots of trees, which they find in plenty upon the mountain
side; and, according to Mr. Tristram, by their continual browsing,
they have extirpated many species of trees which were once common on
the hills of Palestine, and which now can only be found in Lebanon
on the east of the Jordan.
[Illustration: GOATS ON THE MARCH.]
Even when folded together in the same enclosure, the Goats never
mix with the sheep, but gather together by themselves, and they
instinctively take the same order when assembled round the wells at
mid-day.
This instinctive separation of the sheep and the goats naturally
recalls to our minds the well-known saying of our Lord that "before
Him shall be gathered all nations, and He shall separate them one
from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and
He shall set the sheep on His right hand, and the goats on His left."
The image thus used was one that was familiar to all the hearers,
who were accustomed daily to see the herds of sheep and Goats under
one shepherd, yet totally distinct from each other. At feeding-time
the Goats will be browsing in long lines on the mountain sides,
while the sheep are grazing in the plain or valley; at mid-day, when
the flocks are gathered round the wells to await the rolling away
of the stone that guards the water, the Goats assemble on one side
and the sheep on the other. And at night, when they are all gathered
into one fold by one shepherd, they are still separated from each
other. The same image is employed by the prophet Ezekiel: "As for
you, O my flock, thus said the Lord God, Behold I judge between
cattle and cattle, between rams and the he-goats."
Generally, the leading Goat was distinguished by a bell as well as
the leading sheep, and in reference to this custom there was an old
proverb, "If the shepherd takes the lead, he blinds the bell-goat,"
while another proverb is based upon the inferior docility of the
animal--"If the shepherd be lame, the Goats will run away."
Yet the Goat can be tamed very effectively, and can even be
taught to perform many tricks. "We saw just below us, on the
rudely-constructed 'parade,' a crowd of men and children,
surrounding a fantastically-dressed man exhibiting a Goat, which had
been tutored to perform some cunning trick. It stood with its four
feet close together on the top of a very long pole, and allowed the
man to lift it up and carry it round and round within the circle;
then the Goat was perched on four sticks, and again carried about. A
little band of music--pipes, drums, and tambourines--called together
the people from all parts of the town to witness this performance.
"The Goat danced and balanced himself obediently and perfectly, in
very unnatural-looking positions, as if thoroughly understanding the
words and commands of his master. The men who watched the actions of
the Goat looked as grave and serious as if they were attending a
philosophical or scientific lecture." ("Domestic Life in Palestine,"
by Miss Rogers.)
Another feat is a favourite with the proprietors of trained Goats.
The man takes a stool and plants it carefully on the ground, so as
to be perfectly level, and then orders the Goat to stand upon it.
A piece of wood about six inches in length, and shaped something
like a dice-box, is then placed on the stool, and the Goat manages
to stand on it, all his sharp, hard hoofs being pressed closely
together on the tiny surface. The man then takes another piece of
wood and holds it to the Goat's feet. The animal gently removes
first one foot and then another, and, by careful shifting of the
feet, enables its master to place the second piece of wood on the
first. Successive additions are made, until at the last the Goat is
perched on the topmost of some nine or ten pieces of wood balanced
on each other, the whole looking like a stout reed marked off with
joints.
The stately steps and bold bearing of the old he-goat is mentioned
in the Proverbs: "There be three things which go well, yea, four are
comely in going:
"A lion, which is strongest among beasts, and turneth not away for
any;
"A greyhound; an he-goat also; and a king, against whom there is no
rising up." (Prov. xxx. 29-31.) The word which is here rendered as
he-goat signifies literally the "Butter," and is given to the animal
on account of the mode in which it uses its formidable horns. The
word is not common in the Bible, but it is used even at the present
day among the Arabs.
Several herds of goats exist in Palestine, the most valuable of
which is the Mohair Goat, and the most common the Syrian Goat.
These, however dissimilar they may be in appearance, are only
varieties of the ordinary domestic animal, the former being produced
artificially by carefully selecting those specimens for breeding
which have the longest and finest hair. It was from the hair of this
breed that the costly fabrics used in the Tabernacle were woven, and
it is probably to this breed that reference is made in Solomon's
Song, iv. 1, 2: "Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold, thou art
fair; thou hast doves' eyes within thy locks: thy hair is as a flock
of goats, that appear from Mount Gilead.
"Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep that are even shorn, which
came up from the washing." In this passage the careful reader
will also note another reference to the habits of the Goats and
sheep, the hair being compared to the dark-haired Goats that wander
on the tops of the hills, while the teeth are compared to sheep
that are ranged in regular order below. The Mohair Goat is known
scientifically as _Capra Angorensis_. The same image is used again
in chap. vi. 5.
[Illustration: HERD OF GOATS ATTACKED BY A LION.]
The second breed is that which is commonest throughout the country.
It is known by the name of the Syrian Goat, and is remarkable for
the enormous length of its ears, which sometimes exceed a foot from
root to tip. This variety has been described as a separate species
under the name of _Capra Mambrica_, or _C. Syriaca_, but, like the
Mohair Goat, and twenty-three other so-called species, is simply a
variety of the common Goat, _Hircus ægragus_.
Reference is made to the long ears of the Syrian Goat in Amos iii.
12: "Thus saith the Lord: As the shepherd taketh out of the mouth
of the lion two legs, or a piece of an ear; so shall the children
of Israel be taken out that dwell in Samaria." Such a scene, which
was familiar to Amos, the shepherd as well as the prophet, is
represented in the illustration. In the foreground is the goat on
which the lion has sprung, and from which one of the long ears has
been torn away. Its companions are gathering round it in sympathy,
while its kid is trying to discover the cause of its mother's
uneasiness. In the background is a group of armed shepherds,
standing round the lion which they have just killed, while one of
them is holding up the torn ear which he has taken out of the lion's
mouth.
THE WILD GOAT.
The Azelim or Wild Goats of Scripture identical with the Beden
or Arabian Ibex--Different names of the Beden--Its appearance
and general habits--En-gedi, or Goats' Fountain--The Beden
formerly very plentiful in Palestine, and now tolerably
common--Its agility--Difficulty of catching or killing it--How
the young are captured--Flesh of the Beden--Use of the horns at
the present day--The Ako of Deuteronomy.
In three passages of the Old Testament occurs a word, "Azelim,"
which is variously translated in our Authorized Version.
It is first seen in 1 Sam. xxiv. 2, in which it is rendered as
"Wild Goats." "It was told Saul, saying, Behold, David is in the
wilderness of En-gedi [_i.e._ the Fountain of the Goat]. 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 (_azelim_)." The
same word occurs in Job xxxix. 1: "Knowest thou the time when the
wild goats of the rock bring forth?" It is also found in Ps. civ.
18: "The high hills are a refuge for the wild goats." In all these
passages it is rendered as "wild goats." But, in Prov. v. 19, it is
translated as roe: "Rejoice with the wife of thy youth. Let her be
as the loving hind and pleasant roe (_azelah_)." The Jewish Bible
follows the same diverse renderings.
We now have to discover the animal which was signified by the word
Azel. According to its etymology, it is the Climber, just as the
adult he-goat is called the Butter.
That it was a climbing animal is evident from its name, and that
it loved to clamber among precipices is equally evident from the
repeated connexion of the word rock with the name of the animal. We
also see, from the passage in Job, that it is a wild animal whose
habits were not known. There is scarcely any doubt that the Azel of
the Old Testament is the ARABIAN IBEX or BEDEN (_Capra Nubiana_).
This animal is very closely allied to the well-known Ibex of the
Alps, or Steinbock, but may be distinguished from it by one or two
slight differences, such as the black beard and the slighter make
of the horns, which moreover have three angles instead of four, as
is the case with the Alpine Ibex.
The Beden is known by several names. It is sometimes called the
Jaela, sometimes the Nubian Wild Goat, and is also known as the Wild
Goat of Sinai. The general colour of the Beden is grey, becoming
brownish in winter, and being whitish grey beneath. The feet are
spotted with black and white, and the beard of the male is black,
differing from that of the Alpine Ibex, which is brown. The female
is beardless. The lines along the back and the sides of the tail are
black, and there are three streaks on each ear.
The Beden generally lives in little herds of eight or ten, and
is even now to be found in Palestine. At the strange, wild,
weird-looking En-gedi (Ain Jiddy), or Fountain of the Goats, the
Beden is still to be seen. Mr. Tristram suggests that David and
his followers took up their residence at En-gedi for the sake of
the Wild Goats that were plentiful upon the spot, and which would
furnish food for himself and his hardy band of outlaws. "In the
neighbourhood of En-gedi," remarks this traveller, "while encamped
by the Dead Sea shore, we obtained several fine specimens, and
very interesting it was to find the graceful creature by the very
fountain to which it gave name.
"When clambering over the heights above En-gedi, I often, by the
help of my glass, saw the Ibex from a distance, and once, when near
Mar-saba, only a few miles from Jerusalem, started one at a distance
of four hundred yards. At the south end of the Dead Sea they were
common, and I have picked up a horn both near Jericho on the hills
and also on the hills of Moab on the eastern side. At Jericho,
too, I obtained a young one which I hoped to rear, but which died
after I had had it for ten days, owing, I believe, to the milk with
which it was fed being sour. Further north and west we did not
find it, though I have reason to believe that a few linger on the
mountains between Samaria and the Jordan, and perhaps also on some
of the spurs of Lebanon. We found its teeth in the breccia of bone
occurring in the Lebanon, proving its former abundance there."
As the Beden was found so plentifully even in these days when
fire-arms have rendered many wild animals scarce and wary, so that
they will not show themselves within range of a bullet, it is
evident that in the time when David lived at En-gedi and drank of
the Goats' Fountain they were far more numerous, and could afford
nourishment to him and his soldiers. Travellers, moreover, who do
not happen to be experienced hunters, will often fail in seeing
the Beden, even in places where it is tolerably plentiful. The
colour of its coat resembles so nearly that of the rocks, that an
inexperienced eye would see nothing but bare stones and sticks where
a practised hunter would see numbers of Beden, conspicuous by their
beautifully curved horns.
The agility of the Beden is extraordinary. Loving the highest and
most craggy parts of the mountain ridge, it flings itself from
spot to spot with a recklessness that startles one who has not
been accustomed to the animal, and the wonderful certainty of its
foot. It will, for example, dash at the face of a perpendicular
precipice that looks as smooth as a brick wall, for the purpose of
reaching a tiny ledge which is hardly perceptible, and which is
some fifteen feet or so above the spot whence the animal sprang.
Its eye, however, has marked certain little cracks and projections
on the face of the rock, and as the animal makes its leap, it takes
these little points of vantage in rapid succession, just touching
them as it passes upwards, and by the slight stroke of its foot
keeping up the original impulse of its leap. Similarly, the Ibex
comes sliding and leaping down precipitous sides of the mountains,
sometimes halting with all the four feet drawn together, on a little
projection scarcely larger than a penny, and sometimes springing
boldly over a wide crevasse, and alighting with exact precision
upon a projecting piece of rock that seems scarcely large enough to
sustain a rat comfortably.
The young of the Ibex are sometimes captured and tamed. They are,
however, difficult to rear, and give much more trouble than the
young gazelles when taken in a similar manner. The natives can
generally procure the kids at the proper time of year, and sell them
at a very cheap rate. They seldom, however, can be reared, and even
those who live in the country experience the greatest difficulty in
keeping the young Beden alive until it attains maturity.
Were it not for the curious habits of the Beden, the young could
scarcely ever be obtained alive, as they are so agile that they
could easily leap away from their slow two-legged pursuers. But
the mother Ibex has a habit of leading a very independent life,
wandering to considerable distances, and leaving her kid snugly
hidden in some rock-cleft. The hunters watch the mother as she
starts off in the morning, clamber up to the spot where the kid is
concealed, and secure it without difficulty. The Arabs say that
there are always two kids at a birth, but there is considerable
discrepancy of evidence on this point, which, after all, is of very
little importance.
[Illustration: ARABIAN IBEX, OR BEDEN; THE WILD GOAT OF SCRIPTURE.]
The flesh of the Beden is really excellent. It is far superior to
that of the gazelle, which is comparatively dry and hard, and it has
been happily suggested that the Beden was the animal in search of
which Esau was sent to hunt with his quiver and his bow, and which
furnished the "savoury meat" which Isaac loved. None but a true
hunter can hope to secure the Beden, and even all the knowledge,
patience, and energy of the best hunters are tried before they can
kill their prey. It was therefore no matter of wonder that Isaac
should be surprised when he thought that he heard Esau return so
soon from the hunting-grounds. "How is it that thou hast found it so
quickly, my son?"
There are few animals more wary than the Beden, and even the chamois
of the Alps does not exercise the finest qualities of a hunter more
than does the Beden of Palestine. It is gifted with very keen eyes,
which can discern the approach of an enemy long before its grey coat
and curved horns can be distinguished from the stones and gnarled
boughs of the mountain side. And, even if the enemy be not within
range of the animal's sight, its nostrils are so keen that it can
detect a man by scent alone at a considerable distance. Like all
gregarious animals, the Beden insures the safety of the flock by
stationing sentries, which are posted on places that command the
whole surrounding country, and to deceive the watchful senses of
these wary guardians tests all the qualities of the hunter.
The dawn of day is the time that is generally chosen for approaching
a herd, because the animals are then feeding, and if the hunter can
manage to approach them against the wind, he may chance to come
within range. Should however the wind change its direction, he may
quietly walk home again, for at the first breath of the tainted gale
the sentinels utter their shrill whistle of alarm, and the whole
party dash off with a speed that renders pursuit useless.
The horns of the Beden are of very great size, and from their bold
curves, with the large rings and ridges which cover their front,
are remarkably handsome objects. In their own country they are in
great request as handles to knives, and even in England they may be
occasionally seen serving as handles to carving-knives and forks.
As to the word Ako, which occurs in Deut. xiv. 5, together with
other animals, and is rendered as "Wild Goat," there is so much
doubt about the correct translation that I can do no more than
mention that the Jewish Bible follows our authorized edition in
translating Ako as Wild Goat, but adds the doubtful mark to the
word.
[Illustration: deer]
THE DEER.
The Hart and Hind of Scripture--Species of Deer existing in
Palestine--Earliest mention of the Hind--The Hart classed among
the clean animals--Passages alluding to its speed--Care of the
mother for her young, and her custom of secreting it--Tameable
character of the Deer.
We now come to the DEER which are mentioned in Scripture. There are
not many passages in which they are mentioned, and one of them is
rather doubtful, as we shall see when we come to it.
There is no doubt that the two words HART and HIND (in the Hebrew
_Ayzal_ and _Ayzalah_) represent Deer of some kind, and the question
is to find out what kind of Deer is signified by these words. I
think that we may safely determine that no particular species is
meant, but that under the word Ayzal are comprehended any kinds of
Deer that inhabit Palestine, and were likely to be known to those
to whom the earlier Scriptures were addressed. That some kind of
Deer was plentiful is evident from the references which are made
to it, and specially by the familiar word Ajala or Ayala, as it is
pronounced, which signifies the Deer-ground or pasture. But the
attempt to discriminate between one species and another is simply
impossible, and the more careful the search the more impracticable
the task appears.
[Illustration: RED DEER.]
As far as can be ascertained, at least two kinds of Deer inhabited
Palestine in the earlier days of the Jewish history, one belonging
to the division which is known by its branched horns, and the other
to that in which the horns are flat or palmated over the tips.
Examples of both kinds are familiar to us under the titles of the
RED DEER and the FALLOW DEER, and it is tolerably certain that both
these animals were formerly found in Palestine, or that at all
events the Deer which did exist there were so closely allied to them
as to be mere varieties occasioned by the different conditions in
which they were placed.
* * * * *
We will now proceed to the various passages in which the Hart and
Hind are mentioned in the Bible.
[Illustration: FALLOW-DEER, OR HIND OF SCRIPTURE.]
As might be expected, we come upon it among the number of the beasts
which divided the hoof and chewed the cud, and were specially
indicated as fit for food; see Deut. xii. 15: "Notwithstanding thou
mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates, ... the unclean and the
clean may eat thereof, as of the roebuck, and as of the hart."
There is, however, an earlier mention of the word in Gen. xlix.
21. It occurs in that splendid series of imagery in which Jacob
blesses his sons, and prophesies their future, each image serving
ever afterwards as the emblem of the tribe: "Naphtali is a hind let
loose: he giveth goodly words;"--or, according to the Jewish Bible,
"Naphtali is a hind sent forth: he giveth sayings of pleasantness."
Now, such an image as this would never have been used, had not the
spectacle of the "hind let loose" been perfectly familiar to the
eyes both of the dying patriarch and his hearers, and equally so
with the lion, the ass, the vine, the serpent, and other objects
used emblematically in the same prophetic poem.
[Illustration: A QUIET SPOT.]
The excellence of the Hart's flesh is shown by its occurrence among
the animals used for King Solomon's table: see 1 Kings iv. 23, a
passage which has been quoted several times, and therefore need only
be mentioned.
Allusion is made to the speed and agility of the Deer in several
passages. See, for example, Isa. xxxv. 6: "Then shall the lame man
leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing." Again, in 2 Sam.
xxii. 33, 34: "God is my strength and power: and He maketh my way
perfect.
"He maketh my feet like hinds' feet: and setteth me upon my high
places."
Nearly four hundred years afterwards we find Habakkuk using
precisely the same image, evidently quoting David's Psalm of
Thanksgiving:--"Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the
God of my salvation.
"The Lord God is my strength, and He will make my feet like hinds'
feet, and He will make me to walk upon mine high places." (iii. 18,
19.)
A passage of a similar character may be found in Solomon's Song, ii.
8, 9: "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."
There is one passage in the Psalms which is familiar to us in many
ways, and not the least in that it has been chosen as the text
for so many well-known anthems. "As the hart panteth after the
water-brooks, so panteth my soul after Thee, O God.
"My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God: when shall I come
and appear before God?" (Ps. xlii. 1, 2.)
Beautiful as this passage is, it cannot be fully understood without
the context.
[Illustration: RED DEER AND FAWN.]
David wrote this psalm before he had risen to royal power, and while
he was fleeing from his enemies from place to place, and seeking
an uncertain shelter in the rock-caves. In verse 6 he enumerates
some of the spots in which he has been forced to reside, far away
from the altar, the priests, and the sacrifice. He has been hunted
about from place to place by his enemies as a stag is hunted by
the hounds, and his very soul thirsted for the distant Tabernacle,
in which the Shekinah, the visible presence of God, rested on the
mercy-seat between the golden cherubim.
Wild and unsettled as was the early life of David, this was ever
the reigning thought in his mind, and there is scarcely a psalm
that he wrote in which we do not find some allusion to the visible
presence of God among men. No matter what might be the troubles
through which he had to pass, even though he trod the valley of the
shadow of death, the thought of his God was soothing as water to the
hunted stag, and in that thought he ever found repose. Through all
his many trials and adversities, through his deep remorse for his
sins, through his wounded paternal affections, through his success
and prosperity, that one thought is the ruling power. He begins his
career with it when he opposed Goliath: "Thou comest to me with a
sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in
the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel." He
closes his career with the same thought, and, in the "last words"
that are recorded, he charged his son to keep the commandments of
the Lord, that he might do wisely all that he did.
We now come to another point in the Deer's character; namely, the
watchful care of the mother over her young. She always retires to
some secret place when she instinctively knows that the birth is at
hand, and she hides it from all eyes until it is able to take care
of itself. By some strange instinct, the little one, almost as soon
as it is born, is able to comprehend the signals of its mother, and
there is an instance, well known to naturalists, where a newly-born
Deer, hardly an hour old, crouched low to the earth in obedience to
a light tap on its shoulder from its mother's hoof. She, with the
intense watchfulness of her kind, had seen a possible danger, and so
warned her young one to hide itself.
[Illustration: THE LEADER OF THE HERD.]
There is scarcely any animal so watchful as the female Deer, as
all hunters know by practical experience. It is comparatively easy
to deceive the stag who leads the herd, but to evade the eyes and
ears of the hinds is a very different business, and taxes all the
resources of a practised hunter. If they take such care of the herd
in general, it may be imagined that their watchfulness would be
multiplied tenfold when the object of their anxiety is their own
young.
It is in allusion to this well-known characteristic that a passage
in the Book of Job refers: "Knowest thou the time when the wild
goats of the rock bring forth? or canst thou mark when the hinds
do calve?" (xxxix. 1.) A similar image is used in Psa. xxix. 9.
After enumerating the wonders that are done by the voice of the
Lord, the thunders and rain torrents, the devastating tempests, the
forked lightning, and the earthquake "that shaketh the wilderness
of Kadesh," the Psalmist proceeds: "The voice of the Lord maketh
the hinds to calve, and discovereth the forests,"--this being as
mysterious to the writer as the more conspicuous wonders which he
had previously mentioned.
So familiar to the Hebrews was the watchful care which the female
Deer exercised over her young, that it forms the subject of a
powerful image in one of Jeremiah's mournful prophecies: "Yea, the
hind also calved in the field, and forsook it, because there was no
grass." (xiv. 5.) To those who understand the habits of the animal,
this is a most telling and picturesque image. In the first place,
the Hind, a wild animal that could find food where less active
creatures would starve, was reduced to such straits that she was
obliged to remain in the fields at the time when her young was born,
instead of retiring to some sheltered spot, according to her custom.
And when it was born, instead of nurturing it carefully, according
to the natural maternal instinct, she was forced from sheer hunger
to abandon it in order to find a sufficiency of food for herself.
That the Deer could be tamed, and its naturally affectionate
disposition cultivated, is evident from a passage in the Proverbs
(v. 18, 19): "Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife
of thy youth. Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe."
We might naturally expect that the Rabbinical writers would have
much to say on the subject of the Hart and Hind. Among much that
is irrelevant to the object of the present work there are a few
passages that deserve mention. Alluding to the annual shedding of
the Deer's horns, there is a proverb respecting one who ventures
his money too freely in trade, that "he has hung it on the stag's
horns," meaning thereby that he will never see it again. It is
remarkable that in Western Africa there is a proverb of a similar
character, the imprudent merchant being told to look for his money
in the place where Deer shed their horns.
[Illustration: THE WATCHFUL DOE.]
[Illustration: A KNEELING CAMEL.]
THE CAMEL.
CHAPTER I.
The two species of Camel, and the mode of distinguishing
them--Value of the Camel in the East--Thirst-enduring
capability--The hump, and its use to the animal--The Camel as
a beast of draught and burden--How the Camel is laden--Camels
for riding--Difficulty of sitting a Camel--A rough-paced
steed--Method of guiding the Camel--The swift dromedary--Young
Camels and their appearance--The deserted Camel.
Before treating of the Scriptural references to the Camel, it will
be as well to clear the ground by noticing that two distinct species
of Camel are known to zoologists; namely, the common Camel (_Camelus
dromedarius_), which has one hump, and the Bactrian Camel (_Camelus
Bactrianus_), which has two of these curious projections. There is a
popular but erroneous idea that the dromedary and the Camel are two
distinct animals, the latter being distinguished by its huge hump,
whereas the fact is, that the dromedary is simply a lighter and more
valuable breed of the one-humped Camel of Arabia, the two-humped
Bactrian Camel being altogether a different animal, inhabiting
Central Asia, Thibet, and China.
The Camel is still one of the most valued animals that inhabit
Palestine, and in former times it played a part in Jewish history
scarcely inferior to that of the ox or sheep. We shall, therefore,
devote some space to it.
In some parts of the land it even exceeded in value the sheep, and
was infinitely more useful than the goat. At the very beginning of
Jewish history we read of this animal, and it is mentioned in the
New Testament nearly two thousand years after we meet with it in
the Book of Genesis. The earliest mention of the Camel occurs in
Gen. xii. 16, where is related the journey of Abram: "He had sheep,
and oxen, and he-asses, and men-servants, and maid-servants, and
she-asses, and camels."
[Illustration: JACOB LEAVES LABAN AND RETURNS TO CANAAN WITH HIS
CAMELS, SHEEP, AND CATTLE.]
Belonging, as he did, to the nomad race which lives almost wholly on
the produce of their herds, Abram needed Camels, not only for their
milk, and, for all we know, for their flesh, but for their extreme
use as beasts of burden, without which he could never have travelled
over that wild and pathless land. The whole of Abram's outer life
was exactly that of a Bedouin sheikh of the present day, in whom
we find reproduced the habits, the tone of thought, and the very
verbiage of the ancient Scriptures.
Many years afterwards, when the son of his old age was desirous of
marrying a wife of his own kindred, we find that he sent his trusted
servants with ten of his Camels to Mesopotamia, and it was by the
offering of water to these Camels, that Rebekah was selected as
Isaac's wife (see Gen. xxiv. 10, 19). In after days, when Jacob was
about to leave Laban, these animals are mentioned as an important
part of his wealth: "And the man increased exceedingly, and had much
cattle, and maid-servants, and men-servants, and camels, and asses"
(Gen. xxx. 43).
It is thought worthy of mention in the sacred narrative that Job
had three thousand, and afterwards six thousand Camels (Job i. 3,
and xlii. 12); that the Midianites and Amalekites possessed camels
without number, as the sand by the seaside.
[Illustration: A CAMP IN THE DESERT.]
They were valuable enough to be sent as presents from one potentate
to another. For example, when Jacob went to meet Esau, he gave as
his present two hundred and twenty sheep, the same number of goats,
fifty oxen, thirty asses, and sixty camels, i.e. thirty mothers,
each with her calf. They were important enough to be guarded by
men of position. In 1 Chron. xxvii. 30, we find that the charge
of David's Camels was confided to one of his officers, Obil the
Ishmaelite, who, from his origin, might be supposed to be skilful in
the management of these animals. Bochart, however, conjectures that
the word Obil ought to be read as Abal, _i.e._ the camel-keeper, and
that the passage would therefore read as follows: "Over the camels
was an Ishmaelitish camel-keeper."
* * * * *
We will now proceed to the uses of the Camel, and first take it in
the light of food.
By the Mosaic law, the Camel was a forbidden animal, because it did
not divide the hoof, although it chewed the cud. Yet, although the
Jews might not eat its flesh, they probably used the milk for food,
as they do at the present day. No distinct Scriptural reference is
made to the milk of the Camel; but, as the Jews of the present day
are quite as fastidious as their ancestors in keeping the Mosaic
law, we are justified in concluding that, although they would not
eat the flesh of the animal, they drank its milk. At the present
time, the milk is used, like that of the sheep, goat, and cow, both
in a fresh and curdled state, the latter being generally preferred
to the former. A kind of cheese is made from it, but is not much to
the taste of the European traveller, on account of the quantity of
salt which is put in it. Butter is churned in a very simple manner,
the fresh milk being poured into a skin bag, and the bag beaten with
a stick until the butter makes its appearance.
That it was really used in the patriarchal times is evident by the
passage which has already been mentioned, where Jacob is related to
have brought as a present to his brother Esau thirty milch Camels,
together with their young. So decided a stress would certainly not
have been laid upon the fact that the animals were milch Camels
unless the milk were intended for use.
Perhaps the use of the Camel's milk might be justified by saying
that the prohibition extended only to eating and not to drinking,
and that therefore the milk might be used though the flesh was
prohibited.
There was another mode in which the Camel might be used by
travellers to sustain life.
The reader is probably aware that, even in the burning climate in
which it dwells, the Camel is able to go for a long time without
drinking,--not that it requires less liquid nourishment than other
animals, but that it is able, by means of its internal construction,
to imbibe at one draught a quantity of water which will last for
a considerable time. It is furnished with a series of cells, into
which the water runs as fast as it is drunk, and in which it can be
kept for some time without losing its life-preserving qualities. As
much as twenty gallons have been imbibed by a Camel at one draught,
and this amount will serve it for several days, as it has the power
of consuming by degrees the water which it has drunk in a few
minutes.
This curious power of the Camel has often proved to be the salvation
of its owner. It has often happened that, when travellers have been
passing over the desert, their supply of water has been exhausted,
partly by the travellers and partly by the burning heat which causes
it to evaporate through the pores of the goat-skin bottle in which
it was carried. Then the next well, where they had intended to
refill their skins and refresh themselves, has proved dry, and the
whole party seemed doomed to die of thirst.
Under these circumstances, only one chance of escape is left them.
They kill a Camel, and from its stomach they procure water enough
to sustain life for a little longer, and perhaps to enable them to
reach a well or fountain in which water still remains. The water
which is thus obtained is unaltered, except by a greenish hue, the
result of mixing with the remains of herbage in the cells. It is,
of course, very disagreeable, but those who are dying from thirst
cannot afford to be fastidious, and to them the water is a most
delicious draught.
It is rather curious that, if any of the water which is taken out of
a dead Camel can be kept for a few days, both the green hue and the
unpleasant flavour disappear, and the water becomes fresh, clear,
and limpid. So wonderfully well do the internal cells preserve the
water, that after a Camel has been dead for ten days--and in that
hot climate ten days after death are equal to a month here--the
water within it has been quite pure and drinkable.
Many persons believe in the popular though erroneous idea that the
Camel does not require as much water as ordinary animals. He will
see, however, from the foregoing account that it needs quite as much
water as the horse or the ox, but that it possesses the capability
of taking in at one time as much as either of these animals would
drink in several days. So far from being independent of water, there
is no animal that requires it more, or displays a stronger desire
for it. A thirsty Camel possesses the power of scenting water at a
very great distance, and, when it does so, its instincts conquer
its education, and it goes off at full speed towards the spot,
wholly ignoring its rider or driver. Many a desert spring has been
discovered, and many a life saved, by this wonderful instinct, the
animal having scented the distant water when its rider had lost all
hope, and was resigning himself to that terrible end, the death by
thirst. The sacred Zemzem fountain at Mecca was discovered by two
thirsty Camels.
[Illustration: A GRATEFUL SHADE.]
Except by the Jews, the flesh of the Camel is eaten throughout
Palestine and the neighbouring countries, and is looked upon as a
great luxury. The Arab, for example, can scarcely have a greater
treat than a Camel-feast, and looks forward to it in a state of
wonderful excitement. He is so impatient, that scarcely is the
animal dead before it is skinned, cut up, and the various parts
prepared for cooking.
To European palates the flesh of the Camel is rather unpleasant,
being tough, stringy, and without much flavour. The fatty hump is
universally considered as the best part of the animal, and is always
offered to the chief among the guests, just as the North American
Indian offers the hump of the bison to the most important man in the
assembly. The heart and the tongue, however, are always eatable,
and, however old a Camel may be, these parts can be cooked and eaten
without fear.
The hump, or "bunch" as it is called in the Bible, has no connexion
with the spine, and is a supplementary growth, which varies in size,
not only in the species, but in the individual. It is analogous to
the hump upon the shoulders of the American bison and the Indian
zebra, and in the best-bred Camels it is the smallest though the
finest and most elastic.
This hump, by the way, affords one of the points by which the value
of the Camel is decided. When it is well fed and properly cared for,
the hump projects boldly, and is firm and elastic to the touch.
But if the Camel be ill, or if it be badly fed or overworked, the
hump becomes soft and flaccid, and in bad cases hangs down on one
side like a thick flap of skin. Consequently, the dealers in Camels
always try to produce their animals in the market with their humps
well developed; and, if they find that this important part does not
look satisfactory, they use various means to give it the required
fulness, inflating it with air being the most common. In fact, there
is as much deception among Camel-dealers in Palestine as with dog or
pigeon fanciers in England.
Here perhaps I may remark that the hump has given rise to some
strange but prevalent views respecting the Camel. Many persons
think that the dromedary has one hump and the Camel two--in fact,
that they are two totally distinct animals. Now the fact is that
the Camel of Palestine is of one species only, the dromedary being
a lighter and swifter breed, and differing from the ordinary Camel
just as a hunter or racer differs from a cart-horse. The two-humped
Camel is a different species altogether, which will be briefly
described at the end of the present article.
* * * * *
The Camel is also used as a beast of draught, and, as we find, not
only from the Scriptures, but from ancient monuments, was employed
to draw chariots and drag the plough. Thus in Isa. xxi. 7: "And
he saw a chariot with a couple of horsemen, a chariot of asses,
and a chariot of camels." It is evident that in this passage some
chariots were drawn by Camels and some by asses. It is, however,
remarkable that in Kennard's "Eastern Experiences", these two
very useful animals are mentioned as being yoked together: "We
passed through a fertile country, watching the fellaheen at their
agricultural labours, and not a little amused at sometimes remarking
a very tall camel and a very small donkey yoked together in double
harness, dragging a plough through the rich brown soil." Camels
drawing chariots are still to be seen in the Assyrian sculptures. In
Palestine--at all events at the present time--the Camel is seldom
if ever used as a beast of draught, being exclusively employed for
bearing burdens and carrying riders.
Taking it first as a beast of burden, we find several references in
different parts of the Scriptures. For example, see 2 Kings viii.
9: "So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even
of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden." Again, in
1 Chron. xii. 40: "Moreover they that were nigh them, even unto
Issachar and Zebulun and Naphtali, brought bread on asses, and on
camels, and on mules, and on oxen." Another allusion to the same
custom is made in Isaiah: "They will carry their riches upon the
shoulders of young asses, and their treasures upon the bunches (or
humps) of camels."
The Camel can carry a considerable load, though not so much
as is generally fancied. A sort of a pack-saddle of a very
simple description is used, in order to keep the burden upon so
strangely-shaped an animal. A narrow bag about eight feet long is
made, and rather loosely stuffed with straw or similar material. It
is then doubled, and the ends firmly sewn together, so as to form
a great ring, which is placed over the hump, and forms a tolerably
flat surface. A wooden framework is tied on the pack-saddle, and
is kept in its place by a girth and a crupper. The packages which
the Camel is to carry are fastened together by cords, and slung
over the saddle. They are only connected by those semi-knots called
"hitches," so that, when the Camel is to be unloaded, all that is
needed is to pull the lower end of the rope, and the packages fall
on either side of the animal. So quickly is the operation of loading
performed, that a couple of experienced men can load a Camel in very
little more than a minute.
As is the case with the horse in England, the Camels that are
used as beasts of burden are of a heavier, slower, and altogether
inferior breed to those which are employed to carry riders, and
all their accoutrements are of a ruder and meaner order, devoid
of the fantastic ornaments with which Oriental riders are fond of
decorating their favourite animals.
In the large illustration are represented four of the ordinary
Camels of burden, as they appear when laden with boughs for the
Feast of Tabernacles. The branches are those of the Hebrew pine,
and, as may be seen, the animals are so heavily laden with them that
their forms are quite hidden under their leafy burdens. The weight
which a Camel will carry varies much, according to the strength
of the individual, which has given rise to the Oriental proverb,
"As the camel, so the load." But an animal of ordinary strength is
supposed to be able to carry from five to six hundred pounds for a
short journey, and half as much for a long one,--a quantity which,
as the reader will see, is not so very great when the bulk of the
animal is taken into consideration. It is remarkable that the Camel
knows its own powers, and instinctively refuses to move if its
correct load be exceeded. But, when it is properly loaded, it will
carry its burden for hours together at exactly the same pace, and
without seeming more fatigued than it was when it started.
[Illustration: CAMELS LADEN WITH BOUGHS.]
[Illustration: MORNING IN THE DESERT: STARTING OF THE CARAVAN.]
The riding Camels are always of a better breed than those which are
used for burden, and maybe divided into two classes; namely, those
which are meant for ordinary purposes, and those which are specially
bred for speed and endurance. There is as much difference between
the ordinary riding Camel and the swift Camel as there is between
the road hack and the race-horse. We will first begin with the
description of the common riding Camel and its accoutrements.
The saddle which is intended for a rider is very different from the
pack-saddle on which burdens are carried, and has a long upright
projection in front, to which the rider can hold if he wishes it.
The art of riding the Camel is far more difficult of accomplishment
than that of riding the horse, and the preliminary operation of
mounting is not the least difficult portion of it. Of course,
to mount a Camel while the animal is standing is impossible, and
accordingly it is taught to kneel until the rider is seated.
Kneeling is a natural position with the Camel, which is furnished
with large callosities or warts on the legs and breast, which act as
cushions on which it may rest its great weight without abrading the
skin. These callosities are not formed, as some have imagined, by
the constant kneeling to which the Camel is subjected, but are born
with it, though of course less developed than they are after they
have been hardened by frequent pressure against the hot sand.
When the Camel kneels, it first drops on its knees, and then on
the joints of the hind legs. Next it drops on its breast, and then
again on the bent hind legs. In rising it reverses the process, so
that a novice is first pitched forward, then backward, then forward,
and then backward again, to the very great disarrangement of his
garments, and the probable loss of his seat altogether. Then when
the animal kneels he is in danger of being thrown over its head by
the first movement, and jerked over its tail by the second; but
after a time he learns to keep his seat mechanically.
As to the movement of the animal, it is at first almost as
unpleasant as can be conceived, and has been described by several
travellers, some of whose accounts will be here given. One
well-known traveller declares that any person desiring to practise
Camel-riding can readily do so by taking a music-stool, screwing
it up as high as possible, putting it into a cart without springs,
sitting on the top of it cross-legged, and having the cart driven at
full speed transversely over a newly-ploughed field.
There is, however, as great a difference in the gait of Camels as
of horses, some animals having a quiet, regular, easy movement,
while others are rough and high-stepping, harassing their riders
grievously in the saddle. Even the smooth-going Camel is, however,
very trying at first, on account of its long swinging strides, which
are taken with the legs of each side alternately, causing the body
of the rider to swing backwards and forwards as if he were rowing in
a boat.
Those who suffer from sea-sickness are generally attacked with the
same malady when they make their first attempts at Camel-riding,
while even those who are proof against this particular form of
discomfort soon begin to find that their backs are aching, and that
the pain becomes steadily worse. Change of attitude is but little
use, and the wretched traveller derives but scant comfort from
the advice of his guide, who tells him to allow his body to swing
freely, and that in a short time he will become used to it. Some
days, however, are generally consumed before he succeeds in training
his spine to the continual unaccustomed movement, and he finds that,
when he wakes on the morning that succeeds his first essay, his back
is so stiff that he can scarcely move without screaming with pain,
and that the prospect of mounting the Camel afresh is anything but a
pleasant one.
"I tried to sit erect without moving," writes Mr. Kennard, when
describing his experience of Camel-riding. "This proved a relief for
a few minutes, but, finding the effort too great to continue long in
this position, I attempted to recline with my head resting upon my
hand. This last manœuvre I found would not do, for the motion of
the camel's hind legs was so utterly at variance with the motion of
his fore-legs that I was jerked upwards, and forwards, and sideways,
and finally ended in nearly rolling off altogether.
"Without going into the details of all that I suffered for the
next two or three days--how that on several occasions I slid from
the camel's back to the ground, in despair of ever accustoming my
half-dislocated joints to the ceaseless jerking and swaying to and
fro, and how that I often determined to trudge on foot over the
hot desert sand all the way to Jerusalem rather than endure it
longer--I shall merely say that the day did at last arrive when I
descended from my camel, after many hours' riding, in as happy and
comfortable a state of mind as if I had been lolling in the easiest
of arm-chairs."
A very similar description of the transition from acute and constant
suffering to perfect ease is given by Albert Smith, who states that
more than once he has dozed on the back of his Camel, in spite of
the swaying backwards and forwards to which his body was subjected.
[Illustration: THE CAMEL POST.]
If such be the discomfort of riding a smooth-going and good-tempered
Camel, it may be imagined that to ride a hard-going and
cross-grained animal must be a very severe trial to an inexperienced
rider. A very amusing account of a ride on such a Camel, and of
a fall from its back, is given by Mr. Hamilton in his "Sinai, the
Hedjaz, and Soudan:"--
"A dromedary I had obtained at Suk Abu Sin for my own riding did not
answer my expectations, or rather the saddle was badly put on--not
an easy thing to do well, by the way--and one of my servants,
who saw how out of patience I was at the many times I had had to
dismount to have it arranged, persuaded me to try the one he was
riding, the Sheik's present. I had my large saddle transferred to
his beast, and, nothing doubting, mounted it.
"He had not only no nose-string, but was besides a vicious brute,
rising with a violent jerk before I was well in the saddle, and
anxious to gain the caravan, which was a little way ahead, he set
off at his roughest gallop. Carpets, kufieh, tarbush, all went off
in the jolting; at every step I was thrown a foot into the air, glad
to come down again, bump, bump, on the saddle, by dint of holding
on to the front pommel with the left hand, while the right was
engaged with the bridle, which in the violence of the exercise it
was impossible to change to its proper hand. I had almost reached
the caravan, and had no doubt my hump-backed Pegasus would relax his
exertions, when a camel-driver, one of the sons of iniquity, seeing
me come up at full speed, and evidently quite run away with, took it
into his head to come to my assistance.
"I saw what he was at, and called out to him to get out of the way,
but instead of this he stuck himself straight before me, stretching
himself out like a St. Andrew's cross, with one hand armed with a
huge club, and making most diabolical grimaces. Of course the camel
was frightened, it was enough to frighten a much more reasonable
being; so, wheeling quickly round, it upset my unstable equilibrium.
Down I came head foremost to the ground, and when I looked up, my
forehead streaming with blood, the first thing I saw was my Arab
with the camel, which he seemed mightily pleased with himself for
having so cleverly captured, while the servant who had suggested the
unlucky experiment came ambling along on my easy-paced dromedary,
and consoled me by saying that he knew it was a runaway beast, which
there was no riding without a nose-string.
"I now began to study the way of keeping one's seat in such an
emergency. An Arab, when he gallops his dromedary with one of these
saddles, holds hard on with the right hand to the back part of
the seat, not to the pommel, and grasps the bridle tightly in the
other. The movement of the camel in galloping throws one violently
forward, and without holding on, excepting on the naked back, when
the rider sits behind the hump, it is impossible to retain one's
seat. I afterwards thought myself lucky in not having studied this
point sooner, as, from the greater resistance I should have offered,
my tumble, since it was _fated_ I should have one, would probably
have been much more severe. It is true I might also have escaped it,
but in the chapter of probabilities I always think a mishap the most
probable."
[Illustration: A RUNAWAY.]
[Illustration: AN ARAB SHEIK MOUNTED UPON HIS CAMEL.]
It may be imagined that a fall from a Camel's back is not a trifle,
and, even if the unskilful rider be fortunate enough to fall on soft
sand instead of hard rock, he receives a tolerably severe shock,
and runs no little risk of breaking a limb. For the average height
of a Camel's back is rather more than six feet, while some animals
measure seven feet from the ground to the top of the hump.
This height, however, is of material advantage to the traveller. In
the first place it lifts him above the waves of heated air that are
continually rolling over the sand on which the burning rays of the
sun are poured throughout the day; and in the second place it brings
him within reach of the slightest breeze that passes above the
stratum of hot air, and which comes to the traveller like the breath
of life. Moreover, his elevated position enables him to see for a
very great distance, which is an invaluable advantage in a land
where every stranger may be a robber, and is probably a murderer
besides.
The best mode of avoiding a fall is to follow the Arab mode of
riding,--namely, to pass one leg over the upright pommel, which, as
has been mentioned, is a mere wooden peg or stake, and hitching the
other leg over the dangling foot. Perhaps the safest, though not the
most comfortable, mode of sitting is by crossing the legs in front,
and merely grasping the pommel with the hands.
Yet, fatiguing as is the seat on the Camel's back to the beginner,
it is less so than that on the horse's saddle, inasmuch as in the
latter case one position is preserved, while in the former an
infinite variety of seat is attainable when the rider has fairly
mastered the art of riding.
The Camel is not held by the bit and bridle like the horse, but by
a rope tied like a halter round the muzzle, and having a knot on
the left or "near" side. This is held in the left hand, and is used
chiefly for the purpose of stopping the animal. The Camel is guided
partly by the voice of its rider, and partly by a driving-stick,
with which the neck is lightly touched on the opposite side to that
which its rider wishes it to take. A pressure of the heel on the
shoulder-bone tells it to quicken its pace, and a little tap on the
head followed by a touch on the short ears are the signals for full
speed.
There are three different kinds of stick with which the Camel
is driven; one of them, a mere almond branch with the bark, and
an oblique head, is the sceptre or emblem of sovereignty of the
Prince of Mecca. Mr. Hamilton suggests that this stick, called the
"_mesh'ab_," is the original of the jackal-headed stick with which
so many of the Egyptian deities are represented; and that Aaron's
rod that "brought forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded
almonds," was the _mesh'ab_, the almond-branch sceptre, the emblem
of his almost regal rank and authority.
[Illustration: AARON'S ROD BEARS ALMONDS.]
The women mostly ride in a different manner from the men. Sometimes
they are hardy enough to sit the animal in the same way as their
husbands, but as a rule they are carried by the animal rather than
ride it, sitting in great basket-like appendages which are slung on
either side of the Camel. These constitute the "furniture" which
is mentioned in Gen. xxxi. 34. When Jacob left the house of Laban,
to lead an independent life, Rachel stole her father's images, or
"teraphim," and carried them away with her, true to her affectionate
though deceptive nature, which impelled her to incur the guilt of
robbery for the sake of enriching her husband with the cherished
teraphim of her father. From the most careful researches we learn
that these teraphim were used for divining the future, and that they
were made in the human form. That they were of considerable size
is evident from the fact that, when Saul was hunting after David,
his wife Michal contrived to convey him out of the house, and for
a time to conceal her fraud by putting an image (or teraph) into
the bed as a representative of her husband. Had not, therefore, the
camel-furniture been of considerable dimensions, images of such a
size could not be hidden, but they could well be stowed away in the
great panniers, as long as their mistress sat upon them, after the
custom of Oriental travellers and declined to rise on the ready plea
of indisposition.
[Illustration: CAMEL-RIDING.]
This sort of carriage is still used for the women and children. "The
wife and child came by in the string of camels, the former reclining
in an immense circular box, stuffed and padded, covered with red
cotton, and dressed with yellow worsted ornaments. This family
nest was mounted on a large camel. It seemed a most commodious and
well-arranged travelling carriage, and very superior as a mode of
camel-riding to that which our Sitteen rejoiced in (_i.e._ riding
upon a saddle). The Arab wife could change her position at pleasure,
and the child had room to walk about and could not fall out, the
sides of the box just reaching to its shoulders. Various jugs and
skins and articles of domestic use hung suspended about it, and
trappings of fringe and finery ornamented it."
This last sentence brings us to another point which is several
times mentioned in the Bible; namely, the ornaments with which the
proprietors of Camels are fond of bedizening their favourite animals.
Their leathern collars are covered with cowrie shells sewn on them
in various fantastic patterns. Crescent-shaped ornaments are made of
shells sewn on red cloth, and hung so abundantly upon the harness of
the animal that they jingle at every step which it takes. Sheiks and
other men of rank often have these ornaments made of silver, so that
the cost of the entire trappings is very great.
[Illustration: THE DELOUL, OR SWIFT CAMEL.]
We now come to the Swift Camel, or Deloul.
The limbs of the Deloul are long and wiry, having not an ounce of
superfluous fat upon them, the shoulders are very broad, and the
hump, though firm and hard, is very small.
A thoroughbred Deloul, in good travelling condition, is not at
all a pleasing animal to an ordinary eye, being a lank, gaunt, and
ungainly-looking creature, the very conformation which insures its
swiftness and endurance being that which detracts from its beauty.
An Arab of the desert, however, thinks a good Deloul one of the
finest sights in the world. As the talk of the pastoral tribes is of
sheep and oxen, so is the talk of the nomads about Camels. It is a
subject which is for ever on their lips, and a true Bedouin may be
seen to contemplate the beauties of one of these favourite animals
for hours at a time,--if his own, with the rapture of a possessor,
or, if another's, with the determination of stealing it when he can
find an opportunity.
Instead of plodding along at the rate of three miles an hour, which
is the average speed of the common Camel, the Deloul can cover,
if lightly loaded, nine or ten miles an hour, and go on at the
same pace for a wonderful time, its long legs swinging, and its
body swaying, as if it were but an animated machine. Delouls have
been reported to have journeyed for nearly fifty hours without
a single stop for rest, during which time the animals must have
traversed nearly five hundred miles. Such examples must, however,
be exceptional, implying, as they do, an amount of endurance on the
part of the rider equal to that of the animal; and even a journey of
half that distance is scarcely possible to ordinary men on Delouls.
For the movements of the Deloul are very rough, and the rider is
obliged to prepare himself for a long journey by belting himself
tightly with two leathern bands, one just under the arms, and the
other round the pit of the stomach. Without these precautions, the
rider would be likely to suffer serious injuries, and, even with
them, the exercise is so severe, that an Arab makes it a matter of
special boast that he can ride a Deloul for a whole day.
A courier belonging to the Sherif of Mecca told Mr. Hamilton that he
often went on the same dromedary from Mecca to Medina in forty-eight
hours, the distance being two hundred and forty miles. And a
thoroughbred Deloul will travel for seven or eight weeks with only
four or five days of rest.
Even at the present time, these Camels are used for the conveyance
of special messages, and in the remarkable Bornu kingdom a regular
service of these animals is established, two couriers always
travelling in company, so that if one rider or Camel should fail
or be captured by the Arabs, who are always on the alert for so
valuable a prey, the other may post on and carry the message to its
destination.
[Illustration: ANOTHER MODE OF RIDING THE CAMEL.]
The swift dromedary, or Deloul, is mentioned several times in the
Old Testament. One of them occurs in Isa. lx. 6: "The multitude of
camels shall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah." In
this passage a distinction is drawn between the ordinary Camel and
the swift dromedary, the former being the word "gamel," and the
latter the word "beker," which is again used in Jer. ii. 23: "See
thy way in the valley, know what thou hast done: thou art a swift
dromedary."
There is a passage in the Book of Esther which looks as if it
referred to the ordinary Camel and the swift dromedary, but there
is considerable uncertainty about the proper rendering It runs as
follows: "And he wrote in king Ahasuerus' name, and sealed it with
the king's ring, and sent letters and posts on horseback, and riders
on mules, camels, and young dromedaries."
The Jewish Bible, however, translates this passage as follows: "And
sent letters by the runners on the horses, and riders on the racers,
mules, and young mares." Now, the word _rekesh_, which is translated
as "racer," is rendered by Buxtorf as "a swift horse or mule," and
the word _beni-rammachim_, which is translated as "young mares,"
literally signifies "those born of mares."
The Camel-drivers behave towards their animals with the curious
inconsistency which forms so large a part of the Oriental character.
Prizing them above nearly all earthly things, proud of them, and
loving them after their own fashion, the drivers will talk to
them, cheer them, and sing interminable songs for their benefit.
Towards the afternoon the singing generally begins, and it goes on
without cessation in a sort of monotonous hum, as Dr. Bonar calls
it. The same traveller calls attention to a passage in Caussinus'
"Polyhistor Symbolicus," in which the learned and didactic author
symbolizes the maxim that more can be done by kindness than by
blows. "The Camel is greatly taken with music and melody. So much
so, indeed, that if it halts through weariness, the driver does not
urge it with stripes and blows, but soothes it by his songs."
Several travellers have mentioned these songs. See, for example,
Miss Rogers' account of some Bedouins: "Their songs were already
subdued to harmonize with their monotonous swinging pace, and chimed
softly and plaintively with the tinkling of camel-bells, thus--
"'Dear unto me as the sight of mine eyes,
Art thou, O my Camel!
Precious to me as the health of my life,
Art thou, O my Camel!
Sweet to my ears is the sound
Of thy tinkling bells, O my Camel!
And sweet to thy listening ears
Is the sound of my evening song.'
And so on, _ad libitum_."
Sometimes a female Camel gives birth to a colt on the journey. In
such a case, a brief pause is made, and then the train proceeds
on its journey, the owner of the Camel carrying the young one in
his arms until the evening halt. He then gives it to its mother,
and on the following day it is able to follow her without further
assistance. The young Camels are almost pretty, their hair being
paler than that of the adult animal, and their limbs more slender.
Although the young Camel is better-looking than its parents, it is
not one whit more playful. Unlike almost all other animals, the
Camel seems to have no idea of play, and even the young Camel of a
month or two old follows its mother with the same steady, regular
pace which she herself maintains.
In spite of all the kindness with which a driver treats his
Camels, he can at times be exceedingly cruel to them, persisting
in over-loading and over-driving them, and then, if a Camel fall
exhausted, removing its load, and distributing it among the other
Camels. As soon as this is done, he gives the signal to proceed, and
goes on his way, abandoning the wretched animal to its fate--_i.e._
to thirst and the vultures. He will not even have the humanity to
kill it, but simply leaves it on the ground, muttering that it is
"his fate!"
THE CAMEL.