tained by the author of the article on Mazology, in the Edinburgh Encyclopædia, chiefly for the reason that the description of the tail of the behemoth (ver. 17) does not well accord with the nippopotamus. There must be admitted to be some plausibility in this conjecture of Dr. Good, though perhaps I shall be able to show that there is no necessity of resorting to this supposition. The word behemoth (niana), used here in the plural number, occurs often in the singular number, to denote a dumb beast, usually applied to the larger kind of quadrupeds. It occurs very often in the Scriptures, and is usually translated beast, or collectively cattle. It usually denotes land aninals, in opposition to birds or reptiles. See the Lexicons, and Taylor's Hebrew Concordance. It is rendered by Dr. Nordheimer (Heb. Con.) in this place, hippopotamus. The plural form is often used (comp. Deut. xxxii. 24. Job xii. 7. Jer. xii. 4. Hab. ii. 17. Ps. 1. 10), but in no other instance is it employed as a proper name. Gesenius supposes that under the form of the word here used, there lies concealed some Egyptian name for the hippopotamus, so modified as to put on the appearance of a Semitic word. Thus the Ethiopian pehemout denotes water-ox, by which epithet (bomarino) the Italians also designate the hippopotamus." The translations do not afford much aid in determining the meaning of the word. The LXX render it, Ongla, wild beasts; Jerome retains the word, Behemoth; the Chaldee, 2, beast; the Syriac retains the Hebrew word; Coverdale Coverdale renders it, "cruel beast;' Prof. Lee, "the beasts;" Umbreit, Nilpferd, "Nile-horse ;" and Noyes, "riverhorse." The only method of ascertaining, therefore, what animal is here intended, is to compare carefully the characteristics here referred to with the animals now known, and to find in what one these characteristics exist. We may here safely presume on the entire accuracy of the descrip tion, since we have found the previous descriptions of animals to accord entirely with the habits of those existing at the present day. The illustration drawn from the passage before us, in regard to the nature of the animal, consists of two parts. (1.) The place which the description occupies in the argument. That it is an aquatic animal, seems to follow from the plan and structure of the argument. In the two discourses of JEHOVAH (ch. xxxviii.-xli.), the appeal is made, first, to the phenomena of nature (ch Xxxviii.); then to the beasts of the earth, among whom the ostrich is the fowls of the air (ch. xxxix. 26-30); reckoned (ch. xxxix. 1-25); then to and then follows the description of the behemoth and the leviathan. would seem that an argument of this kind would not be constructed withwonders of the deep; and the fair out some allusion to the principal It As presumption, therefore, is, that the reference here is to the principal animals of the aquatic race. The argument in regard to the nature of the animal from the place which the description occupies, seems to be confirmed by the fact that the account o the behemoth is immediately followed by that of the leviathan-beyond all question an aquatic monster. they are here grouped together in the argument, it is probable that they belong to the same class; and if by the the presumption is that the riverleviathan is meant the crocodile, then horse, or the hippopotamus, is here being Egyptian wonders, are every intended. These two animals, as where mentioned together by ancient writers. See Herodotus, ii. 69-71, Diod. Sic. i. 35, and Pliny, Hist. Nat. xxviii. 8. (2.) The character of the animal may be determined from the particular things specified. specified. Those are the following: (a) It is an amphibious animal, or an animal whose usual resort is the river, though he is occasionally on land. This is evident, because he is mentioned as lying under the covert of the reed and the fens; as abiding in marshy π of the elephant, a part of the animal that could not have failed to be alluded to if the description had pertained to him; and (2) that the elephant was wholly unknown in Arabia and Egypt. The hippopotamus ('Iлñoótaμos) or river-horse belongs to the mammalia, and is of the order of the pachydermata, or thick-skinned animals. To this order belong also the elephant, the tapirus, the rhinoceros, and the swine. Edin. Ency., art. Mazology. The hippopotamus is found principally on the banks of the Nile, though it is found also in the other large rivers of Africa, as the Niger, and the rivers which lie between that and the Cape of Good Hope. It is not found in any of the rivers which run north into the Mediterranean except the Nile, and there only at present in that portion which traverses Upper Egypt; and it is found also in the lakes and fens of Ethiopia. It is distinguished by a broad head; its lips are very thick, and the muzzle much inflated; it has four very large projecting curved teeth in the under jaw, and four also in the upper; the skin is very thick, the legs short, four toes on each foot places, or among the willows of the brook (vs. 21, 22), while at other times he is on the mountains, or among other animals, and feeds on grass like the ox, vs. 15, 20. This account would not agree well with the elephant, whose residence is not among marshes and fens, but on solid ground. (b) He is not a carniverous animal. This is apparent, for it is expressly mentioned that he feeds on grass, and no allusion is made to his at any time eating flesh, vs. 15, 20. This part of the description would agree with the elephant as well as with the hippopotamus. (c) His strength is in his loins, and in the navel of his belly, ver. 16. This would agree with the hippopotamus, whose belly is equally guarded by his thick skin with the rest of his body, but is not true of the elephant. The strength of the elephant is in his head and neck, and his weakest part, the part where he can be most successfully attacked, is his belly. There the skin is thin and tender, and it is there that the rhinoceros attacks him, and that he is even annoyed by insects. Pliny, Lib. viii. c. 20. Ælian, Lib. xvii. c. 44. Comp. Notes on ver. 16. (d) He is distin-inverted with small hoofs, and the guished for some peculiar movement of his tail-some slow and stately motion, or a certain inflexibility of the Lail, like a cedar. This will agree with the account of the hippopotamus. See Notes on ver. 17. (e) He is remarkable for the strength of his bones, ver. 18. (f) He is remarkable for the quantity of water which be drinks at a time, ver. 23; and (g) he has the power of forcing his way, chiefly by the strength of his nose, through snares by which it is attempted to take him, ver. 24. These characteristics agree better with the hippopotamus than with any other known animal, and at present critics, with few exceptions, agree in the opinion that this is the animal which is referred to. As additional reasons for supposing that the elephant is not referred to, we may add, (1) that there is no allusion to the proboscis tail is very short. The appearance of the animal, when on land, is represented as very uncouth, the body being very large, flat, and round, the head enormously large in proportion, the feet as disproportionably short, and the armament of teeth in its mouth truly formidable. .The length of a male has been known to be seventeen feet, the height seven, and the circumference fifteen; the head three feet and a half, and the mouth about two feet in width. Mr. Bruce mentions some in the lake Tzana that were twenty feet in length. The whole animal is covered with short hair, which is more thickly set on the under than the upper parts The general color of the animal is brownish. The skin is exceedingly tough and strong, and was used by the ancient Egyptians for the manufacture of shields. They are timid and sluggish on land, and when pursued they betake themselves to the water, plunge in, and walk on the bottom, though often compelled to rise to the surface to take in fresh air. In the day-time they are so much afraid of being discovered, that when they rise for the purpose of breathing, they only put their noses out of the water; but in rivers that are unfrequented by mankind they put out the whole head. In shallow rivers they make deep holes in the bottom to conceal their bulk. They are eaten with avidity by the inhabitants of Africa. The following account of the capture of a hippopotamus serves greatly to elucidate the description in the book of Job, and to show its correctness, even in those points which have formerly been regarded as poetical exaggerations. It is trans lated from the travels of M. Küppell, the German naturalist, who visited Upper Egypt, and the countries still farther up the Nile, and is the latest traveller in those regions. (Reisen in Nubia, Kordofan, &c., Frankf. 1829, p. 52, seq.) "In the province of Dongola, the fishermen and hippopotamus hunters form a distinct class or caste; and are called in the Berber language Hauauit (pronounced Howowit.) They make use of a small canoe, formed from a single tree, about ten feet long, and capable of carrying two, and at most three men. The harpoon which they use in hunting the hippopotamus, has a strong barb just back of the blade or sharp edge; above this a long and strong cord is fastened to the iron, and to the other end of this cord a block of light wood, to serve as a buoy, and aid in tracing out and following the animal when struck The iron is then slightly fastened upon a wooden handle, or lance, about eight feet long. The hunters of the hippopotamus harpoon their prey either by day or by night; but they prefer the former because they can then better parry the ferocious assaults of the enraged animal. The hunter takes in his right hand the handle of the harpoon, with a part of the cord; in his left the remainder of the cord, with the buoy. In this manner he cautiously approaches the creature as it sleeps by day upon a small island, or he watches at night for those parts of the shore where he hopes the animal will come up out of the water, in order to feed in the fields of grain. When he has gained the desired distance (about seven pa ces), he throws the lance with his full strength; and the harpoon, in order to hold, must penetrate the thick hide and into the flesh. The wounded beast commonly makes for the water, and plunges beneath it in order to conceal himself; the handle of the harpoon falls off, but the buoy swims, and indicates the direction which the animal takes. The harpooning of the hippopotamus is attended with great danger when the hunter is perceived by the animal before he has thrown the harpoon. In such cases the beast sometimes rushes, enraged, upon his assailant, and crushes him at once between his wide and formidable jaws-an occurrence that once took place during our residence near Shendi. Sometimes the most harmless objects excite the rage of this animal; thus, in the region of Amera, a hippopotamus once craunched, in the same way, several cattle that were fastened to a water-wheel. So soon as the animal has been successfully struck, the hunters hasten in their canoe cautiously to approach the buoy, to which they fasten a long rope; with the other end of this they proceed to a large boat or bark, on board of which are their companions. The rope is now drawn in; the pain thus occasioned by the barb of the harpoon excites the rage of the animal, and he no sooner perceives the bark, than he rushes upon it; seizes it, if possible, with his teeth; and sometimes succeeds in shattering it, or oversetting it. The hunters, in the mean time, are not idle; they fasten five or six other harpoons in his flesh, and exert all their strength, by means of the cords of these, to keep him close alongside of the bark, sticking in the thickness of his hide. We had at last to employ a small cannon, the use of which at so short a distance had not before entered our minds; but it was only after five of its balls, fired at the distance of a few in order thus to diminish, in some measure, the effects of his violence. They endeavor, with a long, sharp iron, to divide the ligamentum jugi, or to beat in the skull-the usual modes in which the natives kill this animal. Since the carcase of a full-feet, had mangled, most shockingly, grown hippopotamus is too large to be drawn out of the water without quite a number of men, they commonly cut up the animal, when killed, in the water, and draw the pieces ashore. In the whole Turkish province of Dongola, there are only one or two hippopotami killed annually. In the years 1821-23, inclusive, there were nine killed, four of which were killed by us. The flesh of the young animal is very good eating; when full grown, they are usually very fat, and their carcase is commonly estimated as equal to four or five oxen. The hide is used only for making whips, which are excellent; and one hide furnishes from three hundred and fifty to five hundred of them. The teeth are not used. One of the hippopotami which we killed was a very old male, and seemed to have reached his utmost growth. He measured, from the snout to the end of the tail, about fifteen feet, and his tusks, from the root to the point, along the external curve, twenty-eight inch es. the head and body of the monster, that he gave up the ghost. The darkness of the night augmented the horrors and dangers of the contest. This gigantic hippopotamus dragged our large bark at will in every direc tion of the stream; and it was in a fortunate moment for us that he yielded, just as he had drawn the bark among a labyrinth of rocks, which might have been so much the more dangerous, because, from the great confusion on board, no one had observed them. Hippopotami of the size of the one above described cannot be killed by the natives, for want of a cannon. These animals are a real plague to the land, in consequence of their voraciousness. The inhabitants have no permanent means of keeping them away from their fields and plantations; all that they do is to make a noise during the night with a drum, and to keep up fires in different places. In some parts the hippopotami are so bold that they will yield up their pastures, or places of feeding, only when a large number of persons come rushing upon them with sticks and loud cries. The method of taking the hippopotamus by the Egyptians was the following: "It was entangled by a running noose, at the extremity of a long line wound upon a reel, at the same time that it was struck by the spear of the chasseur. This weapon consisted of a broad, flat blade, furnished with a deep tooth or barb at the side, having a strong rope of conOut of twenty-siderable length attached to its upper end, and running over the notched summit of a wooden shaft, which was inserted into the head or blade, In order to kill him, we had a battle with him of four hours long, and that too in the night. Indeed, he came very near destroying our large bark, and with it, perhaps, all our lives. The moment he saw the hunters in the small canoe, as they were about to fasten the long rope to the buoy, in order to draw him in, he threw himself with one rush upon it, dragged it with him under water, and shattered it to pieces. The two hunters escaped the extreme danger with great difficulty. Out of twentyfive musket-balls which were fired into the monster's head, at the distance of five feet, only one penetrated the hide and the bones near the nose; so that every time he breathed he snorted streams of blood upon the bark. All the other balls remained like a common javelin. It was thrown in the same manner, but on striking, the shaft fell, and the iron head alone remained in the body of |