\ 



CHAPTER XXXIX 



FISH WITH AND WITHOUT SCALES — METHODS 

 OF FISHING — VIVARIA 



In Moses' enumeration of what the tribesmen might or might 

 not eat, there is a careful distinction by their names of the 

 creatures in fur and feathers, but the fishes are merely divided 

 (as were the animals entering the ark into " clean and unclean," 

 Gen. vii.) into " all that have fins and scales ye shall eat : 

 and whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye shall not eat ; it 

 is unclean unto you" (Deut. xiv. 9, 10). 



This classification has often been assumed to have been 

 taken from the prohibitions enjoined by the Eg5^tian priest- 

 hood, but without any authority, because we do not know 

 what fish were actually ruled out by their dietary canon. 

 Moses not only Umits the use of fish as an article of food, as 

 originally granted in the covenant with Noah (Gen. ix. 2, 3), 

 but fails to discriminate between fish from the sea and else- 

 where. He does, however, exclude all scaleless fish such as 

 the important group of siluridse, skates, lampreys, eels, and 

 every variety of shell fish.i 



1 The classification, if unscientific and incorrect — e.g. Eels possess rudi- 

 mentary scales — had as its practical purpose the eUmination of the Siliiridcs — 

 I.e. the Catfish Clarias, Bagnis, Synodontis, etc. — which even if, as with the 

 Catfish, pleasant to the taste were very unwholesome, causing diarrhoea, 

 rashes, etc. Doctors inform me that even in our day Jews who eat crustacees, 

 especially lobsters, are far more Uable to these diseases than Christians— 

 presumably from an abstention of centuries. The ban on Eels from their 

 iafrequency in Palestine was almost superfluous, but on the Clarias, which 

 abounds in and near the sea of Tiberias, very practical. The abstention, 

 whether originating from supposed reasons of health or from some obscure 

 tabu, was and still is prevalent in Asia, Africa, and South America. A curious 

 trace of it at Rome is discoverable in Numa's ordinance that in sacrificial 

 offerings no scaleless fish, and no scarus should figure (Pliny, N. H., XXXII. lo). 

 The abstention is sometimes merely partial, as with the Karayis in the 

 Amazon valley, see W. A. Cook, op. cit., p. 96. 



414 



