Job 39:9

Second long strophe JOB’S ATTENTION IS DIRECTED TO THE NONDESCRIPT AND UNTAMEABLE REEM, (WILD BULL,) AND TO THE OSTRICH, WITH HER STRANGE PROPERTIES OF STUPIDITY AND DEFICIENT AFFECTION, Job 39:9-18.

α . The reem, in its structure, resembles the ox so much so as to be classed under the same genus; but no man can reduce him to the plough or harrow, or any servile office. Job, perhaps, can account for so trifling a matter as this, that so much latent power of this creature (“because his strength is great”) should forever remain unavailable for man’s use. Job 39:9-12.

9. The unicorn The word רים , reem, occurs seven times in the Scriptures, and is invariably translated unicorn, or unicorns, in accordance with the Septuagint: Numbers 23:22; Deuteronomy 33:17; Job 39:9-10; Psalms 22:21; Psalms 29:6; Psalms 92:10; and Isaiah 34:7. Among commentators and naturalists some few (Luther, F.A.A. Meyer, Rosenmuller, and Schlottmann) imagine that by this creature the unicorn is intended, but the unicorn is now regarded by most naturalists as fabulous. Others (Jerome, Barnes, etc.) suppose that it is the rhinoceros. Others again (Delitzsch, Dillmann, Hitzig) conjecture that it is the oryx, ( antelope leucoryx,) a species of gazelle, which Oppian describes as “wild and untamable,” and is found in Syria, Egypt, and the interior of Africa. and to the present day called r’im; while others, (Schultens, Ewald, Umbreit, Robinson,) fix upon the buffalo, a view which Dr. Wilson justly scouts, having seen the animal in the Huleh tamely yoked to the plough. ( Lands of the Bible, 2:167.)

A careful examination of the passages above mentioned will, we think, show, first, that the reem could not have been a one-horned animal, for in Deuteronomy 33:17, the horns of the reem are made a ground of comparison; secondly, that the strength of the animal was in his horns, (Deuteronomy 33:17; Psalms 22:21; Psalms 92:10,) which excludes the oryx or antelope, which have but little strength in the horn, and have to depend for their defence on their agility; thirdly, that it must have been of the bovine rather than the cervine species, which appears from demands of the parallelisms both in Deuteronomy 33:17, His (Joseph’s) glory is like the firstling of his BULLOCK, And his horns are like the horns of a REEM: and in Psalms 29:6, He maketh them also to skip like a CALF, Lebanon and Sirion like a young REEM.

The description (Job 39:9-12) depicts the wonted labour of the tame ox, and necessitates the taking this animal as a basis of comparison, as much as the preceding passage (Job 39:5-8) does the tame ass; and no less peremptorily requires a congener, which in this case must be bovine. Of the former existence of a monster answering all these conditions there are manifold evidences, though it is probable that the race has altogether perished. In the opinion of Dr. Tristram it once roamed freely through the forests of Palestine, and answered to the AVEROCHS of the old German, the URUS of Caesar, the BOS PRIMIGENIUS of naturalists. “We have evidence,” he says,” of the averochs in Germany down to the Christian era. The two horns of the reem (unicorn) are the ten thousands of Ephraim and the thousands of Manasseh, both growing out of ONE head, Joseph. Deuteronomy 33:17. This, then, entirely sets aside the fancy that the rhinoceros, which the Jews could scarcely have known, or any one-horned creature, is intended. The monuments of Assyria represent it among the wild animals chased by the compeers of Semiramis and Sennacherib.” Nat. Hist. of Bible, p. 146. This learned naturalist thinks he has found bones of this extinct animal, (the primeval wild ox,) in a mass of bone breccia in the Lebanon, in the flooring of an ancient cave. See his Land of Israel, pp. 11, 12. Assuming, with Dr. Tristram and Prof. Owen, that the reem was probably one with the urus, it becomes doubly interesting to turn to the description of this animal by Caesar. He says, the urus “are of a size little inferior to the elephant: in appearance, colour, and figure they resemble the bull; their strength and velocity are great; and they spare neither man nor beast that come in their way. Even their young are intractable and untamable.” De Bello Gall., 4:29.

Recent philological discoveries tend to identify this animal, (the wild bull, bos primigenius, of the ancients,) with the reem of the Scriptures. It is now accepted by Assyrian scholars, such as Sayce, Norris, Rodwell, that the ideogram for wild bull was rim or rimu. Sir H. Rawlinson thus translates the thirty-fourth section of the inscription of Tiglath Pileser: “Under the auspices of Hercules, my guardian deity, four wild bulls, strong and fierce, in the desert,… with my long arrows tipped with iron, and with heavy blows, I took their lives. Their skin and their horns I brought to my city of Ashur.” The inscription cited by Norris is: “Buchal rimi dan-nu-te,” etc. “Four wild bulls strong and fine; their lives I cut off.” Assyr. Dic., 1:81; likewise, ibid., Job 1:21. The above Assyrian inscription is taken from the broken obelisk of Assur-nat-sir-pal, and is interpreted, “ Rimi… sa pa-an… in nir Lib-na-a-ni i-duk,” “Wild bulls which, opposite the land of the Hittites and at the foot of Lebanon, he killed.” “It appears nothing is wanting to show that the meaning of the Hebrew word reem is a wild bull, and that these animals existed in Palestine in historical times about 800 years before Christ.… The reem is not unfrequently expressed on the monuments as am’si, i . e., ‘the horned reem;’ ‘ si being used ideographically for karnu, ‘a horn,’ the Hebrew keren.” W. Houghton.

These wild bulls were hunted in Palestine, as appears from the monuments. “The wild bull,” says Layard, “from its frequent representation in the bass-reliefs, appears to have been considered scarcely less formidable and noble game than the lion. The king is seen contending with it, and warriors pursue it on horseback and on foot. In the embroideries on the garments of the principal figures it is introduced in hunting scenes, and in groups which appear to have a mythic or symbolical meaning.” Nineveh, 2:429. See, also, Rawlinson’s Ancient Mon., ii, pp. 513, 514.