Fishing from the earliest times - Blog

2i6FISH IN SACRIFICES—VIVARIA—ARCHIMEDESPlutarch {Symp., VIII. 3) would seem indeed the onlyexception : he straightly asserts, according to Nonnius andothers, that " no fish is fitting for offering or sacrifice." 1This is but another instance of Plutarch's being saddledwith responsibility for some expression or opinion uttered byone of his characters, as is clearly shown by the words :" Sylla, commending the discourse, added with regard to thePythagoreans that they tasted especially the flesh sacrificedto the gods, but that no fish is fit for offering or sacrifices."P. Stengel holds that fish, with the curious exception ofthe Eel,were not sacrificed to the gods in early days, becausethey neither possessed blood which could be poured forth atthe altar, nor could they be offered up alive as could bean enemy, a sacrifice which found special favour in divineeyes. 2This statement, unless explained in some manner, contrastsqueerly with the passage in Plutarch's Life ofNuma Pompilius,where the king is taught by Picus and Faunus, reinforcedsubsequently by Jupiter himself, to make a lustration " as acharm against thunder and lightning, composed of Onions,Hair, and Pilchards "! Lest these curious constituents arouseyour mirth and infect you with doubt as to their efficacy,hearken unto Plutarch's further words, " which is used even"unto this day !From this account (wittily versed by Ovid) ^ we discoverJupiter, resentful at being brought down to earth by themagic of Picus and Faunus, ordering the charm to consist " ofHeads— " " Of onions," replied Numa. " Human— " " Hairs,"said Numa, desirous to fence against the dreadful injunction,Ceres, and Venus—claimed a particular sacrificiable fish or fishes. Sometimesfishes were offered to two or more gods, e.g. the mullet to Ceres andProserpine. Cf. J. G. Stuck, Sacrorum et sacrificiorum gentil. descripHo, ii. p. 72.^ ixdvoi'v §€ 6v(TtfJ.os ovSfls ovSf iepfv(rifJ.6s 4