« AnteriorContinuar »
tion of him, and presumptive evidence of his exist We are now prepared to consider what answers ence, (as a gazelle, not a bull.]
may be given to the objections of Mr. Parkhurst, &c. Observe, that though what animals are extant in as 1st, that the rhinoceros stands connectedly distinsouthern Africa only, may safely be considered as un guished from the beeve kind in sacred Scripture. known to Job; yet proofs of their restriction to those Answer, he might even be reckoned by the Arabians, countries must be produced, before we can admit the &c. in the days of Job, among the beeve kind, since impossibility, or improbability, of his being informed Pausanias, who was many centuries later, calls him of them, from some other part of the world.
Ethiopian BULL,” [Taupys TYS TE Astromixxs] or “bull This militates effectually against the observations of Ethiopia,” as if he was known in Ethiopia by the of Mr. Parkhurst, that the double horned rhinoceros name of a bull : but this name would not alter his cbarwas known only in the southern regions of Asia and acter, or his form ; the creature though called a bull, Africa, since certainly he was known to the Romans, and ranged among the beeve kind, might nevertheless who never penetrated to those southern regions; and be the rhinoceros. we have the testimony of Mr. Bruce that he inhabits 2dly, The strongest argument of Mr. Parkhurst is, the forests of Ethiopia, in the north of Africa, from that the rhinoceros does not push with his horns, as whence he might easily be known, and well known the reem is said to do, but rips up boughs of trees, too, in Egypt, and from Egypt, in Arabia.
&c. into laths. In answer, it may be queried, whethWe are sure that the Romans had great commerce er the import of the Hebrew word negur, on which with Africa, and received from thence many cargoes Mr. P's argument is founded, is not fairly and corof wild beasts; among them was the rhinoceros with rectly expressed by the extulit of Martial; for negur two horns ; this, I say, we suppose they received properly signifies to drive forward, to propel, and from Africa, for to suppose they received it from Asia, some have rendered it by to toss up, to elevate ; and would infer the probability of its being still better
extulit signifies to take up; but then we may suppose known in Arabia, and, by consequence, to Job, than the rhinoceros did not carry the bear on his horns, it is fair, at present, to infer.
but endeavoured to jerk him as high as he well could, The mention of the double horned rhinoceros being while counteracted by the resistance and struggles of known at Rome, leads to a reflection on the hyper
his antagonist. Now, this is precisely what a bull criticism of Bochart, who would vary a line of Martial, would have done ; no bull, a wild bull especially, Spect. Epig. lib. iv. No. 82.
would, strictly speaking, push his enemy, which ene
my is not understood to be a fellow bull, but of Namque gravem gemino cornû sic extulit ursum,
another kind, but he would endeavour to thrust his Jactat ut impositas taurus in astra pilas.
horn into the body of his adversary, and would enin which the poet says, “the rhinoceros tossed up a
deavour to throw bim over his back; so far there heavy bear with his double horn ;" to
is a resemblance in the action of these creatures: yet Namque gravi geminum cornô sic extulit urum.
there must be a difference ; for Jacob says, with “ the rhinoceros tossed up two wild bulls with his these two horns, acting at the same instant, as I unstrong horn :" this emendation misled both Mr. derstand it, shall he push; this, Martial informs us, Maittaire, and Dr. Mead, for a time.
was strictly true of the double horned rhinoceros, who, Besides this testimony of Martial, we have the Do- taking the bear on both his horns, threw hiin up; but mitian medal, in which the figure of the rhinoceros whether a bull would throw with both horns at the same has two horns on the nose, very plain : and the de- instant, I protest I do not certainly know; but from the cisive authority of Pausanias, who says he saw it at divergence of his horns, I suppose he would not, at least Rome. “I saw also the Ethiopian BULL, which is he would not in regard to such little balls as Martial also called rhinoceros, because a born projects from supposes his bull might throw; for the poet seems to the end of his nose, and a little ABOVE it, another say, “The rhinoceros having raised the bear on bis [xav anno vtep AUTO 8 Meya] not large ; but it has none horns, or got him fairly on his two horns, extulit, on its head.” [This description is correct ; which threw him up, as easily as a bull would throw up little I notice, because Mr. Taylor in his translation of Pau balls placed on his head.” So that I think, upon the sanias has made his author say, "a horn projects whole, the action of the rhinoceros as described by from the extremity of its nostril, and another small this ancient writer, may stand as a comment on the one under it,” which is contrary, as well to probabil- action which Jacob attributes to his reem. ity, as to nature.]
3dly, As to the domestic labours, &c. mentioned by These authorities demonstrate that the double way of antiphrasis, as not to be intrusted to the reem, horned rhinoceros was known anciently in Rome, and they suit the rhinoceros quite as well as the urus; if in Rome, why not in Egypt? since he is extant in since the rhinoceros when of full age is perhaps as Ethiopia; and if in Egypt, why not to the writer of untameable and untractable as any creature living. the book of Job ? since this is clearly the African “ In Bengal, Sian, and other southern parts of India, species.
where the rhinoceros is perhaps still more common