;84 



NATURE 



[M 



\.\\: A::. -= antelope termed iii'yof>>o( by HcrodotuK 

 beinK ^'i'l unidi-ntlik'd, and lhercft)re havinj^ no rlaint 

 to J»c' rcj^arded as the oquivalent of ihe Hibrew 



The real misfortune is, however, uluei well-Unown 

 iin^'lish names of plants and animals are j«iven as 

 the equivalents of Hebrew words of totally different 

 si<'nifieation. Examples of this are apple for apricot, 

 t:h»'stnut for ^ilane, sycomore or sycamore (etymo- 

 loj^ically justihable) for a fij; of the banyan f^roup, 

 ferret for an animal which may have been a t*eoko, 

 the aforesaid coney for the Syrian hyrax, and, above 

 all. badger (in the shape of badgers' skins) for the 

 Red Sea dugong. 'Hie last is indeed a particularly 

 bad case, as it should have been obvious that badgers' 

 skins, even in a comparatively dry climate, do not 

 form suitable material for a church-roof. The case 

 of "coney" has been complicated by the word havinj^ 

 fallen practically into disuse, in the original sense, 

 in consequence of which many persons, and especially 

 Americans, appear to regard it as the proper English 

 name of the hyrax. 



In nearly all the cases where the real meaning 

 of the original cannot be ascertained, or where, as 

 in the instance of sycomore, we have no vernacular 

 name for the species referred to, it appears to me 

 that it would be much better if the Hebrew word 

 were retained, with a brief marginal explanation. 



In modern times much light has been thrown oh 

 Bible natural history by identifying the old Hebrew- 

 names of animals and plants with their apparent 

 equivalents in Arabic and Coptic, and likewise by 

 the study of the animals represented in the Assyrian 

 and other ancient sculptures, as well as in the 

 Egyptian frescoes. The mummified aninials of Egypt 

 h.'ive also contributed their quota of information. 

 There is, however, little doubt that if further attention 

 ivere devoted to the correct identification of the animals 

 in the magnificent series of Assyrian and Babylonian 

 sculptures in the British Museum still more informa- 

 tion might be obtained. 



In our own country the great pioneer in this line 

 of research was the late Canon Tristram, whose 

 "Natural History of the Bible" and "Fauna and 

 Flora of Palestine " still remain standard authori- 

 ties. To Tristram we owe the identification of the 

 Hebrew reem, mistranslated unicorn in the authorised 

 version, with the extinct wild ox, or aurochs, the 

 name apparently still surviving in the Arabic rim, 

 now applied in North Africa to certain large gazelles. 

 And in his works will be found mention of the iden- 

 tity of the Hebrew neshcr (translated eagle) with the 

 .Arabic naine, nisr, of the grifTon vulture; of the 

 Hebrew cahh (rendered tortoise) with dab, the .Arabic 

 term for the lizards of the genus Uromastix, and 

 many other analog^ous instances. Unfortunatelv, 

 Tristram was led to believe that several kinds of 

 large North .African antelopes, such as the bubal 

 hartebeest, the addax, and the white or sabre-horned 

 oryx, were natives of Palestine and the adjacent re- 

 gions, whereas it is now ascertained that none of 

 these ranges to the east of the Lower Nile, although 

 the white oryx was brought down from the interior bv 

 the ancient Egyptians. Consequently his identifica- 

 tions of Bible ruminants are to a great extent 

 erroneous, but an attempt has been made to correct 

 them in the new edition of " Murray's Dic- 

 tionary of the Bible." Important information, 

 especially in reg-ard to insects, will also be found in 

 the "Oxford Bible." On the Continent, Dr. Duerst, 

 in various publications, has contributed largely to 

 our knowledge of the cattle— wild and tame— of 

 Biblical tirties, while Dr. Lortet and his associates, 

 whose studies of their mummified remains are pub- 

 NO. 2168, VOL. 86] 



U»hed in the Archives of the Lyons v 

 done the same for the >heep, goatii, dogs, A:c. 



To attempt anything like a complete survev of Bibli< 

 natural history in the space at my disposal is ob\ ■ 

 impossible, and references can only be made to 

 pomts of j^eneral interest. Whatever may hav- 

 the origin of the story of Jonah, it is curious t.- 

 that in the Ethiopic Bible the whale i> referred tj 

 as anber, the Arabic equivalent of ambergris, and 

 was thus evidently regarded as the sperm-whale, by 

 which alone that perfumr is produced. Here my 

 readers may be reminded that ambergris w.-i- '' 

 original amber, the latter word having been - 

 quently transferred to the substance now !:•• 

 that name. .Although leviathan in one pas> 

 undoubtedly to indicate a whale, it genei..... .*.,,- 



to the Egyptian crocodile, the range of which, until 

 recently at any rate, extended tb Syria, and formerh . 

 as attested by the story of St. George and the dragon. 

 included .Asia Minor. 



The above usage of one and the same IT 

 word in two senses is not unparalleled in the !■ 

 and must have been another sore difficulty in th-. 

 path of the translators. Tinshemcth, for instance, 

 which is translated in one passage as mole and in 

 others as swan, is considered to indicate the chamar- 

 leon in Leviticus xi. 30, while in another part of thi- 

 same book it is believed to stand for some kind ct 

 aquatic bird, which may perhaps have been the purpl'- 

 water-hen. Before leaving tinshemcth, it may b'- 

 added that not only were the translators wrong when 

 they rendered it mole, but that they were also in 

 error when they identified another Hebrew word, 

 hcphor-perdth, with that animal; for, as a matter of 

 fact, there are no moles in Palestine and Syria, and 

 the burrowing animal indicated would seem to be 

 one of the rodent mole-rats of the genus Spalax. 



In the rendering of the names of birds, the trans- 

 lators were in several instances either exactly or 

 approximately correct, pelican, crane, stork, quail, 

 and partridge being exact translations, while glede 

 (an old name of the kite) and hawk are near enough 

 approximations for the smaller birds of prey, as i> 

 also swallow for swift. It is curious, however, that 

 in two passages where swallow and crane are men- 

 tioned together, the latter name is employed as th • 

 translation of the Hebrew word meaning swallow (or 

 rather swift), and vice vcrs6. Sparrow, the transla- 

 tion of fct/>/)or = " the chirper," is doubtless used in u 

 general sense, although, as Tristram pointed out. 

 the solitary sparrow on the housetop is in all prot)- 

 ability the blue rock-thrush. Possibly such names as 

 " gier-eagle " (from the German gier, a vulture, and 

 familiar in the form of lammergier) and "ossifrage" 

 may have been in use in this country in the seven- 

 teenth century, but nowadays neither conveys an\ 

 definite meaning to the reader, the former really in- 

 dicating the Egyptian scavenger-vulture, or 

 " Pharaoh's hen," and the latter the lammergier. 

 Lapwing is distinctly an unfortunate translation. *h • 

 bird indicated being probably the hoopoe. 



In regard to invertebrates, it may be noted ih.u 

 the rendering of sds in Isaiah as worm is not far out, 

 as the word indicates the lar\'a of a clothes-nK)th. 

 and it has been suggested to me that the "booth th.nr 

 the keeper maketh " (Job xxvii. \S) refers to the 

 rough larval case of a psychid moth. "Canker- 

 worm " is now generally admitted to refer to one of 

 the immature stages of the locust, and in the Oxford 

 Bible it is suggested that " palmer-worm " may in- 

 clude not only caterpillars, but likewise a second 

 immature phase of the locust, which would accord 

 well with the context. Locust, grasshopper, ant, 

 hornet, bee, fly, flea, and scorpion are correct, or 



