have been discovered and brought to Rome, by those whom the Romans employed to explore the remotest countries, with the express view of collecting the rarest animals they contained, in order to be exhibited at the public shows. The tiger, the rhinoceros, and other animals, natives of regions which the Roman eagles never visited, were often exhibited in the amphitheatre, before the proud oppressors of the world. So numerous and diversified were the animals produced on the arena at their public entertainments, that Aristides, in his encomium of Rome, declared, "All things meet here, whatsoever is bred or made; and whatsoever is not seen here, is to be reckoned among those things which are not, nor ever were." But, although these shows continued for many ages, not a single unicorn was ever exhibited at Rome; a strong proof that no such animal existed. In modern times, the remotest countries in Asia have been traversed, in almost every direction, by intelligent and inquisitive travellers; but no animal of this kind has been discovered; nor has the least information been obtained concerning the unicorn, among the natives. From these facts it may be safely concluded, that the unicorn exists only in the imagination of vain and credulous writers, and by consequence, cannot be the reem of the sacred Scriptures.

The rhinoceros, on the contrary, was often exhibited in the amphitheatre at Rome; and has been frequently seen by modern travellers. No doubt, therefore, can be entertained concerning the reality of its existence : but the character of the reem, given in the Scriptures, will not apply to this animal. The reem, it is evident, was equally well known to Moses and the prophets, and the people whom they addressed, as the bullocks and the bulls with which

they are mentioned. But the rhinoceros inhabits the southern parts of Africa, and the remotest parts of the east, beyond the Ganges; and by consequence, could be still less known to the people of Israel than the elephant, which is not once mentioned in the sacred volume.

Besides, the reem has large horns; for, says the Psalmist, "My horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn;" but the rhinoceros has seldom more than one, and that of a small size, not exalted like the horn of a reem, but turned back towards the forehead. Nor will the use to which the reem applies his horns, correspond with the manners of the rhinoceros: the former pushes with his horns, which must therefore be placed on his forehead; but the horn of the latter, which is placed on his nose, and bent backwards, is not formed for pushing, but for ripping up the trunks or bodies of the more soft and succulent trees, and reducing them into a kind of laths, which constitute a part of the animal's food."

It is the opinion of others, that the reem is a species of wild bull; which they have endeavoured to establish by several plausible arguments. In many places of scripture, say they, the ox and the reem are joined together, as animals of the same family; in others, the latter is represented as a strong and fierce animal, with large and very strong horns, greatly addicted to push, and by consequence, an enemy much to be dreaded. The reem, therefore, cannot be the buffalo, because his horns being turned inward are unfit for the combat; but either the bison, or the urus. It is rather supposed, however, that the urus is the reem of the Hebrews, because the bison, though a very fierce and obstinate animal, may be subdued by the m Bruce's Trav. vol. iv, p. 91.

art of man, and at length entirely domesticated. But as to the urus, Cæsar says expressly, that they cannot be tamed and rendered useful to mankind, not even their young ones excepted; they are therefore taken in pits and destroyed. Pliny thus describes the urus: He is of a size little inferior to the elephant; in appearance, colour, and figure, he resembles the bull; his strength and velocity are great; and he neither spares man nor beast that comes in his way."

These arguments have considerable weight; but they are liable to the same objections which these very writers have urged with so much force against the claims of the unicorn and the rhinoceros. It is by no means probable, that the sacred writers would make so many allusions to animals, with which the people whom they addressed were utterly unacquainted; would speak so familiary about them; would borrow their figures and illustrations from their form, dispositions, and manners; or, that Jehovah himself would converse with Job so long about a creature, which was unknown to the people of those countries. The urus sculked from the remotest times, in the deep recesses of the Hircanian forest; and was quite unknown to the Romans before the time of Cæsar. Neither the urus nor the bison, according to Pliny, were to be found in Greece; and the former has been considered by some authors, as a native of Germany. It is even admitted by Boetius, who strenuously maintains the claims of the urus, that he can find no writer who says, that these wild oxen are produced in Syria and Palestine. Aben Ezra, on the contrary, asserts in his commentary on the prophecies of Hosea, that no wild bull is to be found in Judea, and the

n Nat. Hist. lib. viii, cap. 15 and 70.

surrounding countries. It is not sufficient to say, that these varieties of the bovine family, may have existed there in the times of Moses and the prophets, for a mere conjecture proves nothing. If they existed once, why do they not exist now, as well as the wild goat, the hart, and the antelope? Why is not a single trace of them to be found in the warmer climates of Greece and Asia? Pliny indeed states, that the Indian forests abounded with wild oxen; but it will not follow, that the urus was known to the Jews, because it was discovered in the forests of India, the regions of Scythia, or the more remote wilds of Africa. But the truth is, we have no proof that he meant to speak of the urus or the bison; he only mentions wild oxen in general; from which no certain argument can be drawn in support of the opinion which Boetius and others maintain.

It now remains to be shewn, that the reem of the Old Testament Scriptures is not a variety of the wild ox, but must be classed among the goats. This point the learned Bochart has decided, by numerous quotations from the Arabian, and other eastern writers, in which the original word reem is applied to a species of wild goat, which inhabits the deserts of Palestine, and the neighbouring regions. The statements of the Arabian writers, as quoted by him, are clear and precise; "The reem," says one, "is a goat of a snow white colour; another, "The reem, the plural of which is aram, denotes a goat of a pure white colour, like those which inhabit the sandy deserts." Goats, says Damir, are of different colours; they are of three distinct species, of which the first are called aram, the singular of which is reem. Their colour is a pure white; they inhabit the desert, and become very fat. From these testi

monies it is evident, that the word reem among the Arabians, denoted the noblest species of wild goat, equally remarkable for its obesity, and the snowy whiteness of its colour. This species are also distinguished by carrying their heads very high, and pricking their ears; from whence it is apprehended, they derive their name. In this application of the original term, the Syriac version, the Chaldee paraphrasts, and the Talmudical writers, all agree with the Arabian historians."

To invalidate the force of these arguments, it has been urged, that the reem is connected in the sacred writings with bullocks and bulls, and must therefore be some kindred animal. He stands high on his limbs, and has a large and portly frame; while the goat is the smallest of the horned tribes. The former is represented in the book of Job, as very strong, and a fit companion for the ox in the labours of the field; and prevented from taking part in tilling the ground, bringing home the seed, and gathering it into the barn, only by his fierce and intractable disposition. But a goat is not possessed of great strength, although sufficiently vigorous and active for the sphere in which it is intended to move; it is too weak to draw in the same yoke with the ox, or to take any part in the toils of the husbandman. Hence, in all ages, and among every people, the wild, equally as the domestic goat, has been exempted from the yoke; and their immunity confirmed by the ancient adage, Exsga ays agorça, goats are exempted from the plough. We learn from the prayer of David, already quoted, that the horns of the reem are high; but those of the goat, although somewhat elongated, are not to be compared with the antlers of the stag.

Bochart. Hieroz. lib. iii, cap. 27, p. 948, &c.