AND FIRDAUSI’S—HALIEUTICA 177 
—to which halting and involved translation we at least neither 
bow laurels nor doff hats. 
The Halieutica is divided into five books. The first two 
treat of the natural history of fishes, the other three of the art 
of fishing. Despite this proportion of space, fish rather than 
fishermen are the heroes of the scenes. The work displays 
considerable knowledge of zoology, coupled with absurd fables, 
which are adduced as grave matters of fact. 
In the fulness with which he enumerates the various kinds 
of fish, and methods of fishing, the technique, the weapons, 
the materials appropriate to each, Oppian stands pre-eminent 
among our authors. Nor need we wonder at this fullness of 
treatment. He was wedded heart and soul to all pertaining 
to fish, or fishing, which he calls the “ lovely art.” 
The kinds of fish mentioned by this ‘“‘ poeta doctissimus ”’ ! 
number, according to Bishop Hieronymus, one hundred and fifty- 
three. This figure is verified by Ritter, who adds that “‘ Pliny’s 
long list contains only twenty-three more, 7.e. one hundred and 
seventy-six in all,” a total which hardly warrants the naturalist’s 
triumphal outburst, “‘ In the sea and in the ocean, vast as it is, 
there exists by Hercules! nothing that is unknown to us, 
and a truly marvellous feat it is that we are best acquainted 
with those things which Nature has concealed in the deep.” ? 
From the only English translation of the Halieutica (made 
in 1722 by Diaper and Jones, Fellows of Balliol) I take a few 
passages illustrating the character and methods of Oppianic 
fishing.? 
The latter at once arrest our attention by their modernity. 
They are practically ours. Apostolides in his work describing 
fishing in modern Greece states that “les quatre engins 
1 “De quibus Oppianus Cilix est, poeta doctissimus, 153 esse genera 
piscium, que omnia capta sunt ab Apostolis, et nihil remansit incaptum, dum 
et nobiles et ignobiles, divites et pauperes, et omne genus hominum de mari 
hujus seculi extrahitur ad salutem.” Comment. in Ezechiel. Cf. Ritter, 
op. cit., p. 376. 
2 N. H., XXXII. 53. 
3 The great objection to this translation, owing probably to the difficulty 
of expressing—certainly of compressing—the “ intractable ’’ subject matter 
in the rhymed verse adopted by the translators, is its weary verbiage: for 
instance, one passage of three lines in the translation needs twelve, and another 
of nine needs thirty! Diaper was the author of Neveides, or Sea-Eclogues. 
