The Works of Sir Thomas Browne Volume III Part 25

OF THE FISHES EATEN BY OUR SAVIOUR with His Disciples after His Resurrection from the Dead.

TRACT III

SIR,

I have thought, a little, upon the Question proposed by you [viz. _What kind of Fishes those were of which our Saviour ate with his Disciples after his Resurrection?_[257]] and I return you such an Answer, as, in so short time for study, and in the midst of my occasions, occurs to me.

[257] _S._ Joh. 21. 9, 10, 11, 13.

The Books of Scripture (as also those which are Apocryphal) are often silent, or very sparing, in the particular Names of Fishes; or in setting them down in such manner as to leave the kinds of them without all doubt and reason for farther inquiry. For, when it declareth what Fishes were allowed the Israelites for their Food, they are onely set down in general which have Finns and Scales; whereas, in the account of _Quadrupeds_ and Birds, there is particular mention made of divers of them. In the Book of _Tobit_ that Fish which he took out of the River is onely named a great Fish, and so there remains much uncertainty to determine the Species thereof. And even the Fish which swallowed _Jonah_, and is called a _great Fish_, and commonly thought to be a great Whale, is not received without all doubt; while some learned men conceive it to have been none of our Whales, but a large kind of _Lamia_.

And, in this narration of S. _John_, the Fishes are onely expressed by their Bigness and Number, not their Names, and therefore it may seem undeterminable what they were: notwithstanding, these Fishes being taken in the great Lake or Sea of _Tiberias_, something may be probably stated therein. For since _Bellonius_, that diligent and learned Traveller, informeth us, that the Fishes of this Lake were Trouts, Pikes, Chevins and Tenches; it may well be conceived that either all or some thereof are to be understood in this Scripture. And these kind of Fishes become large and of great growth, answerable unto the expression of Scripture, _One hundred and fifty-three great Fishes_; that is, large in their own kinds, and the largest kinds in this Lake and fresh Water, wherein no great variety, and of the larger sort of Fishes, could be expected. For the River _Jordan_, running through this Lake, falls into the Lake of _Asphaltus_, and hath no mouth into the Sea, which might admit of great Fishes or greater variety to come up into it.

And out of the mouth of some of these forementioned Fishes might the _Tribute money_ be taken, when our Saviour, at _Capernaum_, seated upon the same Lake, said unto _Peter_, _Go thou to the Sea, and cast an Hook, and take up the Fish that first cometh; and when thou hast opened his mouth thou shalt find a piece of money; that take and give them for thee and me_.

And this makes void that common conceit and tradition of the Fish called _Fabermarinus_, by some, a _Peter_ or _Penny Fish_; which having two remarkable round spots upon either side, these are conceived to be the marks of S. _Peter's_ Fingers or signatures of the Money: for though it hath these marks, yet is there no probability that such a kind of Fish was to be found in the Lake of _Tiberias_, _Geneserah_ or _Galilee_, which is but sixteen miles long and six broad, and hath no communication with the Sea; for this is a mere Fish of the Sea and salt Water, and (though we meet with some thereof on our Coast) is not to be found in many Seas.

Thus having returned no improbable Answer unto your Question, I shall crave leave to ask another of your self concerning that Fish mentioned by _Procopius_,[258] which brought the famous King _Theodorick_ to his end: his words are to this effect: 'The manner of his Death was this, _Symmachus_ and his Son-in-law _Boethius_, just men and great relievers of the poor, Senatours and Consuls, had many enemies, by whose false accusations _Theodorick_ being perswaded that they plotted against him, put them to death and confiscated their Estates. Not long after his Waiters set before him at Supper a great Head of a Fish, which seemed to him to be the Head of _Symmachus_ lately murthered; and with his Teeth sticking out, and fierce glaring eyes to threaten him: being frighted, he grew chill, went to Bed, lamenting what he had done to _Symmachus_ and _Boethius_; and soon after died.' What Fish do you apprehend this to have been? I would learn of you; give me your thoughts about it.

[258] _De Bello Gothico, lib. 1._

_I am_, etc.

AN ANSWER TO CERTAIN QUERIES relating to Fishes, Birds, Insects.

TRACT IV

SIR,

I return the following Answers to your Queries which were these,

[1. What Fishes are meant by the Names, _Halec_ and _Mugil_?

2. What is the Bird which you will receive from the Bearer? and what Birds are meant by the Names _Halcyon_, _Nysus_, _Ciris_, _Nycticorax_?

3. What Insect is meant by the word _Cicada_?]

[Sidenote: _Answer to Query 1._]

The word _Halec_ we are taught to render an _Herring_, which, being an ancient word, is not strictly appropriable unto a Fish not known or not described by the Ancients; and which the modern Naturalists are fain to name _Harengus_; the word _Halecula_ being applied unto such little Fish out of which they were fain to make Pickle; and _Halec_ or _Alec_, taken for the Liquamen or Liquor itself, according to that of the Poet,

----_Ego faecem primus et Alec Primus et inveni piper alb.u.m_----

And was a conditure and Sawce much affected by Antiquity, as was also _Muria_ and _Garum_.

In common constructions, _Mugil_ is rendred a _Mullet_, which, notwithstanding, is a different Fish from the _Mugil_ described by Authours; wherein, if we mistake, we cannot so closely apprehend the expression of _Juvenal_,

----_Quosdam ventres et Mugilis intrat._

And misconceive the Fish, whereby Fornicatours were so opprobriously and irksomely punished; for the _Mugil_ being somewhat rough and hard skinned, did more exasperate the gutts of such offenders: whereas the Mullet was a smooth Fish, and of too high esteem to be imployed in such offices.

[Sidenote: _Answer to Query 2._]

I cannot but wonder that this Bird you sent should be a stranger unto you, and unto those who had a sight thereof: for, though it be not seen every day, yet we often meet with it in this Country. It is an elegant Bird, which he that once beholdeth can hardly mistake any other for it.

From the proper Note it is called an _Hoopebird_ with us; in Greek _Epops_, in Latin _Upupa_. We are little obliged unto our School instruction, wherein we are taught to render _Upupa_, a _Lapwing_, which Bird our natural Writers name _Vannellus_; for thereby we mistake this remarkable Bird, and apprehend not rightly what is delivered of it.

We apprehend not the Hieroglyphical considerations which the old aegyptians made of this observable Bird; who considering therein the order and variety of Colours, the twenty six or twenty eight Feathers in its Crest, his lat.i.tancy, and mewing this handsome outside in the Winter; they made it an Emblem of the varieties of the World, the succession of Times and Seasons, and signal mutations in them. And therefore _Orus_, the Hieroglyphick of the World, had the Head of an Hoopebird upon the top of his Staff.

Hereby we may also mistake the _Duchiphath_, or Bird forbidden for Food in _Leviticus_ [SN: Levit. 11. 19.]; and, not knowing the Bird, may the less apprehend some reasons of that prohibition; that is, the magical virtues ascribed unto it by the aegyptians, and the superst.i.tious apprehensions which that Nation held of it, whilst they precisely numbred the Feathers and Colours thereof, while they placed it on the Heads of their G.o.ds, and near their Mercurial Crosses, and so highly magnified this Bird in their sacred Symbols.

Again, not knowing or mistaking this Bird, we may misapprehend, or not closely apprehend, that handsome expression of _Ovid_, when _Tereus_ was turned into an _Upupa_, or Hoopebird.

_Vert.i.tur in volucrem cui sunt pro vertice Cristae, Protinus immodic.u.m surgit pro cuspide rostrum Nomen Epops volucri, facies armata videtur._

For, in this military shape, he is aptly phancied even still revengefully to pursue his hated Wife _Progne_: in the propriety of his Note crying out, _Pou, pou, ubi, ubi_, or _Where are you?_

Nor are we singly deceived in the nominal translation of this Bird: in many other Animals we commit the like mistake. So _Gracculus_ is rendred a _Jay_, which Bird notwithstanding must be of a dark colour according to that of _Martial_,

_Sed quandam volo nocte nigriorem Formica, pice, Gracculo, cicada._

_Halcyon_[259] is rendred a _King-fisher_, a Bird commonly known among us, and by Zoographers and Naturals the same is named _Ispida_, a well coloured Bird frequenting Streams and Rivers, building in holes of Pits, like some Martins, about the end of the Spring; in whose Nests we have found little else than innumerable small Fish Bones, and white round Eggs of a smooth and polished surface, whereas the true _Alcyon_ is a Sea Bird, makes an handsome Nest floating upon the Water, and breedeth in the Winter.

[259] _See Vulg. Err. B. 3. c. 10._

That _Nysus_ should be rendred either an _Hobby_ or a _Sparrow Hawk_, in the Fable of _Nysus_ and _Scylla_ in _Ovid_, because we are much to seek in the distinction of Hawks according to their old denominations, we shall not much contend, and may allow a favourable lat.i.tude therein: but that the _Ciris_ or Bird into which _Scylla_ was turned should be translated a _Lark_, it can hardly be made out agreeable unto the description of _Virgil_ in his Poem of that name,

_Inde alias volucres mimoque infecta rubenti Crura_----

But seems more agreeable unto some kind of _Haemantopus_ or Redshank; and so the _Nysus_ to have been some kind of Hawk, which delighteth about the Sea and Marishes, where such prey most aboundeth, which sort of Hawk while _Scaliger_ determineth to be a Merlin, the French Translatour warily expoundeth it to be some kind of Hawk.

_Nycticorax_ we may leave unto the common and verbal translation of a _Night Raven_, but we know no proper kind of Raven unto which to confine the same, and therefore some take the liberty to ascribe it unto some sort of Owls, and others unto the Bittern; which Bird in its common Note, which he useth out of the time of coupling and upon the Wing, so well resembleth the croaking of a Raven that I have been deceived by it.

[Sidenote: _Answer to Query 3._]