Bible Animals. J. G. Wood
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Bible Animals - J. G. Wood страница 6

СКАЧАТЬ The Asp and the Adder, or the Cobra and the Cerastes. (Psa. lviii. 4; Gen. xlix. 17) 542 The Viper, or Toxicoa. (Job xx. 16) 553 The Frog. (Exod. viii. 3) 558 Fishes—Muræna, Barbel, and Sheat-fish. (Levit. xi. 10) 566 Fishes—Sucking-fish, Tunny, and Coryphene. (Levit. x. 9) 569 Fishes—Lates, Mullus, and Uranoscopus. (Numb. xi. 5) 582 The Pearl Oyster. (Matt. xiii. 45) 594 The Bee. (Isa. vii 19) 606 The Hornet. (Exod. xxiii. 28) 614 The Ant. (Prov. vi. 6) 621 The Crimson Worm, or Cochineal. (Isa. i. 18) 623 Butterflies and Caterpillars of Palestine. (Joel i. 4) 631 Flies. (Isa. vii. 18) 635 The Scorpion. (Rev. ix. 10) 641 The Coral. (Job xxviii. 18) 648

       Table of Contents

      BIBLE ANIMALS.

       Table of Contents

      The Monkey tribe rarely mentioned in Scripture—Why the Ape was introduced into Palestine—Solomon's ships, and their cargo of Apes, peacocks, ivory and gold—Various species of Monkey that might have been imported—The Rhesus Monkey—The Hoonuman or Entellus—Habits of the Monkey, and reverence in which it is held by the natives—The Egyptians and their Baboon worship—Idols and memorials—The Wanderoo—its singular aspect—Reasons why it should be introduced into Palestine—General habits of the Wanderoo—its love of curiosities—Probability that Solomon had a menagerie—Various species of Monkey that maybe included in the term "Kophim"—The Satyr of Scripture—Babylon in its glory and fall—Fulfilment of prophecy—Judaic ideas of the Satyrs, or Seirim.

      Animals belonging to the monkey tribe are but sparingly mentioned in Holy Writ. If, as is possible, the Satyr of Scripture signifies some species of baboon, there are but three passages either in the Old or New Testament where these animals are mentioned. In 1 Kings x. 22, and the parallel passage 2 Chron. ix. 21, the sacred historian makes a passing allusion to apes as forming part of the valuable cargoes which were brought by Solomon's fleet to Tharshish, the remaining articles being gold, ivory, and peacocks. The remaining passage occurs in Is. xiii. 21, where the prophet foretells that on the site of Babylon satyrs shall dance.

      The reason for this reticence is simple enough. No monkey was indigenous to Palestine when the various writers of the Bible lived, and all their knowledge of such animals must have been derived either from the description of sailors, or from the sight of the few specimens that were brought as curiosities from foreign lands. Such specimens must have been extremely rare, or they would not have been mentioned as adjuncts to the wealth of Solomon, the wealthiest, as well as the wisest monarch of his time. To the mass of the people they must have been practically unknown, and therefore hold but a very inferior place in the Scriptures, which were addressed to all mankind.

      There is scarcely any familiar animal, bird, reptile or insect, which is not used in some metaphorical sense in the imagery which pervades the whole of the Scriptures. For example, the various carnivorous animals, such as the lion, wolf, and bear, are used as emblems of destruction in various ways; while the carnivorous birds, such as the eagle and hawk, and the destructive insects, such as the locust and the caterpillar, are all similarly employed in strengthening and illustrating the words of Holy Writ.

      But we never find any animal of the monkey tribe mentioned metaphorically, possibly because any monkeys that were imported into Palestine must only have been intended as objects of curiosity, just as the peacocks which accompanied them were objects of beauty, and the gold and ivory objects of value—all being employed in the decoration of the king's palace.

      The question that now comes before us is the species of monkey that is signified by the Hebrew word Kophim. In modern days, we distinguish this tribe of animals into three great sections, namely, the apes, the baboons, and the monkey; and according to this arrangement the ape, being without tails, must have been either the chimpanzee of Africa, the orang-outan of Sumatra, or one of the Gibbons. But there is no reason to imagine that the word Kophim was intended to represent any one of these animals, and it seems evident that the word was applied to any species of monkey, whether it had a tail or not.

      THE RHESUS СКАЧАТЬ