On Animals dep'icicd on Antique Monutnenls. 69 



single individual, of whicli we do not see much more than the 

 head raised above the waters of the Nile. The characters of the 

 hippopotamus are so well indicated upon the mosaic, that it can- 

 not be confounded with any other animal. 



As to the rhinoceros, it is not so well drawn ; and as it has 

 only one horn, it must be regarded as one of the Indian species. 

 The word P<vxsg«;, written underneath, still more indicates, if 

 there had been room for doubt, the animal to which it must be 

 referred. 



Two other pachyderma, placed to the right of the rhinoceros, 

 have the Greek word E<p<«Ao?, or E<p«Soi, written over them. This 

 word is found at the margin of one of the pieces of the mosaic, 

 and perhaps, in the act of moving, some of the letters had been 

 lost. It is still, however, possible that this figure represented 

 an animal which, according to Pliny and Solinus, was found in 

 Ethiopia, where it was known under the name of " Eale" (lib. 

 vii. cap. iil. — Solin, cap. 55.). This species, as to size, comes 

 near to the hippopotamus ; it was fawn-coloured ; its tail resem- 

 bled that of tile elephant, and its jaw that of the wild boar. Its 

 head was furnished with horns, which sometimes pointed down- 

 wards. The majority of these characters correspond with the 

 pachyderma, and particularly with the wild boar, some of which 

 have tusks so long as to resemble horns. The Latin word Eale, 

 and the Greek word EipasAos, differ only in the termination, and 

 the addition of one letter, which was perhaps forgotten in the 

 text of Pliny, or, more probably, added in the mosaic of Pales- 

 trina. However this may be, the animal to which the term 

 E<pecXoi refers is evidently an animal of the order Pachyderma, 

 and of the genus wild-boar. Ail that remains, therefore, is to 

 determine the species. A large tubercle, supported upon a bony 

 protuberance, exists only in the Madagascar hog, the Sus lar- 

 vatus of Cuvier; and this variety now exhibiting it, there is 

 much probability that it is to tliis species that we ought to refer 

 the animal under review. 



The second species of the genus, near to which we read, ac- 

 cord to Montfaucon, the word Xoie^owoTXf^ov, or, according to Bar- 

 thelemy, x<wgo7r(tf>jxe;, is of much more difficult determination. 

 According to the first of these antiquaries, the expression by 

 which the artist who constructed the mosaic would have dcsig- 



