re'em and unicorn and wild ox
Ben and Jo Crick
ben.crick at argonet.co.uk
Fri Jun 14 20:51:11 EDT 2002
On Fri 14 Jun 2002 (16:10:53), schmuel at bigfoot.com wrote:
> However, when we look at the Septuagint ...In all nine verses above,
> the LXX supports the idea of a single-horned creature, using the word
> "monokeros" (derived "mono-" meaning "singular" or "one", and "keras"
> meaning "horn"). .. It should be remembered though, that a single-horned
> creature seems to create the Deut 33:17 problem mentioned above.
> [snip fascinating post]
I was always taught that Rhinoceros was the most plausible candidate for
Re:'eM. The Rhino has one notable horn on its nose; albeit there is a smaller
one just behind it, it looks like "one horn" when viewed from the front.
/Rhinoceros/ is directly derived from Greek hRINOKERAS, *nose* horn, as you
acknowledge. Rhino horn also is persistently reputed to have aphrodisiac
properties; hence maybe the derivation from the root R'M, to rise or be lifted
up (Zechariah 14:10)? (trying not to sound crude here)
The Aurochs or wild ox has been extinct since the 17th century CE. But surely
it had two horns of equal size, left and right. "The horns of a unicorn"
QaR:NeY Re:'eM (horns plural; unicorn singular) could mean that Aurochs is
intended in Deuteronomy 33:17.
Rhinoceros is my candidate for Re'em. It has one notable horn between its
eyes (compare Daniel 8:5, Tsaphiyr, he-goat). One notable horn; and one
insignificant horn behind it (cf Daniel 8:9). Daniel's beasts were symbolical
dream vision "heraldic" animals, having attributes from other species grafted
Revd Ben Crick BA CF, and Mrs Joanna (Goodwin) Crick
<ben.crick at argonet.co.uk>
232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
More information about the b-hebrew