« The Myth of Myth
Main
What The Heck Is Wrong With This Guy »
September 5, 2009
On Unicorns, Rhinoceros And Wild Oxen
Does the Bible mention unicorns? Answers in Genesis, although they are not completely sure, thinks it may and so does PZ Myers at Pharyngula. If these two even partially agree on anything, it is certainly worth looking into. The answer depends on what one means by "Bible" and perhaps even what one means by "unicorn." It will take two posts to sort this all out and even then, while we will be clear on the most important points, we will not be fully satisfied on a couple of abnormal issues.
Various forms of the word רְאֵם, re'em, occur nine times in the Hebrew Bible. For reasons I will outline below, there can be little doubt that the Hebrew means wild ox or the like (very possibly aurochs, Bos primigenius). For some reason, in seven of these occurrences the Old Greek translates the Hebrew μονόκερως (single horned). On one occasion, Isaiah 34:7a, the Old Greek reads άδροι ("thick" and of animals "fat ones") and on another occasion, Job 39:10, the Old Greek avoids the need to translate the word. The Latin Vulgate, almost certainly with an eye to the Greek, renders the word rinoceros (rhinoceros) six times and unicornis (one horned) three times. And from this, one can see in part how the King James Version translators and others came to use "unicorn" consistently. So if the King James translation is your Bible, then unicorns are in your Bible. If the Latin Vulgate is your Bible then on three occasions unicorns are in your Bible, the other times you will have to deal with rhinoceros. If the Old Greek is your Bible, then as we will eventually see, things are not so clear and if the Hebrew Bible is your Bible, it lacks any reference of unicorns.
Two questions present themselves for further study: First, does Hebrew רְאֵם, re'em, really mean wild ox or the like or does it refer to some single horned animal? Second, if the Hebrew does indeed mean wild ox, why did the Old Greek render it μονόκερως? And why isn't the Vulgate consistent?
To help with these considerations I've compiled the following list of all nine occurrences. In each case, the Hebrew word (in a few cases a little more than just the single word) follows the reference. The Old Greek translation and then the Vulgate Latin translation then follow the Hebrew. Finally, I provide a translation of the verse or partial verse to provide a little local context.
Numbers 23:22 = Numbers 24:8a כְּתוֹעֲפֹ֥ת רְאֵ֖ם, μονοκέρωτος (μονόκερως), rinocerotis
God who freed them from Egypt is like the horns of a re'em.
Deuteronomy 33:17a, רְאֵם, μονοκέρωτος, rinocerotis
Like a firstling bull in his majesty, he has horns like the horns of a re'em. With them, he gores the peoples . . .
Job 39:9a, רֵּים , μονόκερως, rinoceros
Would the rîm agree to serve you? Would he spend the night at your crib?
Job 39:10, רֵ֭ים , - - , rinocerota
Can you hold the rîm by ropes to the furrow? Would he plow up the valleys behind you.
Psalms 22:22(21), וּמִקַּרְנֵ֖י רֵמִ֣ים עֲנִיתָֽנִי, μονόκερώτος, unicornium
Deliver me from the mouth of the lion; from the horns of remîm (pl) rescue me.
Psalms 29:6, בֶן־רְאֵמִֽים, μονόκερώτος, rinocerotis
He makes them skip like a calf; Lebonon and Sirion, like a son of rem'emîm (pl)
Psalm 92(91):11a(10a), וַתָּ֣רֶם כִּרְאֵ֣ים קַרְנִ֑י, μονόκερώτος, unicornis
You raise my horn (sg) like a re'em.
Isaiah 34:7a, רְאֵמִֽים, άδροι ("thick," "stunt" and of animals "fat ones"), unicornis
Re'emîm (pl) shall fall
All these usages are metaphorical in one way or another. We see both the singular, רְאֵם, and the plural, רֵמִים/רְאֵמִים. For this reason, we can be rather certain that our word is not a collective and therefore one should not understand רְאֵם with a plural meaning. One of the words used to designate its horns, תוֹעֲפֹת, is rather unusual. "Eminences" would be a more literal translation. See the JPS note on Numbers 23:22 and most Hebrew lexicons. But we see in Psalms 22:21(22) the far more common word for horn(s), קרן. When we look at the Numbers examples and the Deuteronomy example, where רְאֵם is in the singular, the word translated horns is in the plural, the horns of the a רְאֵם and not the horns of many רְאֵמִֽים. Unfortunately, the form of תוֹעֲפֹת does not allow us to distinguish the dual and the plural so we cannot be sure on grounds of grammar alone that the רְאֵם have but two "eminences." On a superficial reading one might see a possible exception to all this, Psalm 92(91):11a(10a). One might think that here our animal has but a single horn. If so, this would be contrary to the other evidence. But the focus of this line is not the animal but the singer of the psalm. YHWH makes the singer's horn rise. Whatever "my horn" means it is surely an indication of vitality. See, for example, I Samuel 2:1 or Psalm 89:25(24). Psalm 92(91):11a(10a) does not appear to have anything to do with the horns of the רְאֵמִֽים and everything to do with their liveliness, their vitality. Based on the Hebrew, it is clear that we are dealing with a rather fierce but otherwise well known animal and Isaiah 34:7a indicatives that it may be some sort of a bovine. But then, Psalms 22:21(22) might lead one to think it were a kind of feline.
We get additional insight from the Akkadian cognate. Akkadian rīmu/rēmu/ri'mu designates a wild ox as opposed to a domestic ox. CAD R, 360-61, provides several relevant examples. In the following translations, "wild bull" indicates a male animal and "wild cow" designates a female animal of the same species. These animals are hunted: "he himself smote a wild bull (rīma) in the mountain." They live in the wild: "bear, hyena, panther, tiger(?), stag, cheetah, lion, wild bulls (rīmū) - all the animals of the wilderness (Gilgamesh VIII:17)." There are several Akkadian texts that mention lions and rīmū together. And yes, there are metaphorical uses of the name of this animal: "I led them like a fierce will bull (rīmu)." And apropos to a couple of our Hebrew cases, "Mullissu, the wild cow (rīmtu) of Enlil-rank, most impetuous among the goddesses, gored my enemies with her powerful horns (qarnēša gašrāte)" and "hold onto the horns of the wild bull (rīmi) and hold onto the tail(?) of the lion, do not grab onto the tail(?) of the fox." Hammurabi is a "fierce wild bull (rīmu) who gores the enemies." He is "the strong king, the wild bull (rīm) among the kings." Other texts tell us that rīmū are huge, that they associate with wild asses and that they have a recognizable body shape. Nowhere is there any indication that they have but one horn, quite the contrary, they have two.
Finally, the canonical school vocabulary text Hh XIII 280f reads
GUD = al-pi
<GUD>.AM = ri-i-[mu].
alpu, bull, ox, and rīmu are clearly different but morphologically related animals. While we are looking at Akkadian vocabulary texts, Malku V:49 reads ri-'-mu = ri-i-mu. Does this somehow speak to the variant spelling, רֵּים, that we see in Job? I will leave this question unanswered. But the variety of forms of this lexeme in both Hebrew and Akkadian are interesting.
All this evidence taken together makes it all but certain that Hebrew רְאֵם means wild ox/bull and certainly excludes any one horned animal, real or imagined.
Why does the Old Greek translate our word μονόκερως? The bottom line is that no one knows for sure. Even so, that will be the subject of a future post that will take us all the way from prehistory to Photius in the 7th century CE, back to Ctesias, ~400 BCE, and then to representations of rīmū in profile. Having already taken this journey without you, I am still not sure why Old Greek reads what it does or why the Vulgate reads sometimes rinoceros and sometimes unicornis. But the trip is abnormally interesting.
Posted by Duane Smith at September 5, 2009 3:46 PM | Read more on Hebrew Bible |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2997
Comments
Good stuff. It would be even more abnormally interesting if this correlated with the epithet of Ilu at Ugarit; but alas, it's a different word.
Posted by: Jim Getz at September 6, 2009 7:13 AM
It's possible that the Old Greek preserves an earlier Hebrew text, which for some reason was systematically changed in future Hebrew manuscripts.
Posted by: Qohelet at September 6, 2009 11:12 PM
I am eagerly waiting for the next post!
Posted by: afarensis, FCD at September 7, 2009 7:08 AM
Qohelet,
Interesting suggestion. I'll take it up in my second post on this subject.
afarensis
That may take a day or two because I need to spend some time at the library to look through a couple of things.
Posted by: Duane at September 7, 2009 7:08 AM
Just a thought.
Texts in Indus script are frequently accompanied by a unicorn (or the other way round).
These enigmatic unicorns are very bull-like.
Posted by: ZU at September 17, 2009 11:24 AM
ZU,
Thanks for the comment. It seems likely to me that these images played into Ctesias' (according to Photius) suggestion in his Indica that there were one horned animals in India. But I doubt they were the only thing that influenced him. Aristotle, likely following Ctesias, seems to point to the same animal as one of his two one horned beasties. Both Ctesias and Aristotle took these animals as subjects of biological inquiry rather than mythological creatures. Some scholars think, with reason, that in both cases the real animal was some kind of a rhinoceros. Stay tuned. I hope to have more to say on all this soon.
Posted by: Duane at September 17, 2009 2:44 PM
Post a comment
Please read Abnormal Interest's Comments Policy.