Richard Whitekettle, «Rats are Like Snakes, and Hares are Like Goats: A Study in Israelite Land Animal Taxonomy», Vol. 82 (2001) 345-362

Israelite taxonomic thought drew a contrast between a land animal taxon referred to by the words Cr#$ or #&mr that contained animals such as rats and snakes (Land Animals I), and a land animal taxon referred to by the words hmhb or hyx that contained animals such as hares and goats (Land Animals II). This essay shows that the Land Animals I taxon was characterized by locomotory movement in the horizontal plane and the Land Animals II taxon was characterized by locomotory movement in the vertical plane. Thus, the contrast was between land animals that were perceived to move along the ground (Land Animals I) and land animals that were perceived to move over the ground (Land Animals II).

        To summarize, the textual record is of little help in determining the character of Cr#$/#&mr movement. It is of little help, then, in determining how the Israelites distinguished between Land Animals I and Land Animals II.

        III. Scholarly Descriptions of the Manner
of Movement of the Land Animals I Taxon

        Scholars have described the movement of Land Animals I as swarming, scurrying, crawling, or creeping¹¹. Though these words may capture something of the quality of movement of the animals in the Land Animals I taxon, they are too vague to explain precisely how the Israelites distinguished Land Animals I from Land Animals II. For example, it is unclear whether the words refer to a mechanical quality, or the speed of an animal’s movements, and if a quality, what quality. Furthermore, none of these words accurately describes the range of movement exhibited by the full complement of the animals assigned to the Land Animals I taxon, or, the varied movements/gaits which each kind of animal assigned to the Land Animals I taxon is capable of. Finally, it is hard to know how to describe the non-swarming/scurrying/crawling/creeping movement of the animals assigned to the Land Animals II taxon in a way that would accurately describe the movement of all the animals assigned to that class of Land Animals, and the varied movements/gaits which each of those animals exhibits.

        Scholars have also attempted to describe the locomotory habit of Land Animals I by describing the spatial relationship between an animal and the ground. For example, the animals assigned to the Land Animals I taxon have been described as, ‘creatures that keep close to the ground’, and, ‘creatures whose bodies appear to move close to the ground’¹². One has only to think of a lizard and a rat (members of the Land Animals I taxon) in contrast to a horse and a camel (members of the Land Animals II taxon) to realize that, in general, the animals in the Land Animals I taxon do move close to the ground. However, closeness-to-the-ground is not sufficiently precise to distinguish Land Animals I from Land Animals II.