Page:Notes and Queries - Series 12 - Volume 2.djvu/457

 12 s. ii. DEC. 2, WIG.] NOTES AND QUERIES.

451

or the authorizing power to paskan (give judgment), and to make new laws in emer- gency for their brethren, whereby historic continuity from Mosaic times onwards was ecclesiastically secured unto the latest generations.

There are several minor references to fishing tackle in the Talmud, mainly of a ritual tendency. Two must be quoted. One shows the Rabbins in an amiable light, .as true sportsmen, willing to give even a fish a fair chance for its life ; the other is no Jess interesting as it corroborates events recorded in Matt. xv. 34, 36 ; Luke v. 5 ; and John xxi. 6, regarding the incertitude of the " catches " in the Sea of Galilee. We take the last-mentioned reference first. " Fishing," we read in Baba Kamma, 81b, " is allowed in the Sea of Tiberias provided anchors are not dropped to stay the ship's progress ; but fish may be taken in nets and drags." It is founded on an ancient rescript. In former times, the Rabbins say, all the tribes entered into a com- pact to that effect. The Sea of Tiberias being in Naphtali's territory, the custom arose in accordance with an ancient prophecy (Deut. xxxiv. 23) : " The sea and the South is your exclusive inheritance."

The other passage is extracted from Sanhedrin, 81b : " Resh Lokish, taking his text from Psalm xxxiv. 22, 'The wicked are destroyed by their own misdeeds/ said, manner of his dying, he is in no better case than fishes " caught in a trap " (bimmet- zoodo rongo).' On his disciples inquiring what that was, he answered, ' I meant to say, " on a hook " (bechakko).' '' In Keilim, 30a, a list of piscatorial devices is given. The modof, palstur, metzoodous, hasakrin, are all species of " hooks," while the okkun, roloov, and kloov are nets and gins for trapping the finny tribes. Keilim, 36a, and Baba Basra, 75a, give chayrem&n.d kennigia, as nets only.
 * Seeing that no man knows the hour or the

We have now to discuss the question of rods or handles. It has been stated that there is no mention of "a fishing-rod " in the Old and New Testaments. If it means that the R.V. does not render any of the numerous passages of Scripture by that set phrase, this cannot be contradicted. Yet there are places, such as Job xl. 31, where the Hebrew words are translated " barbed irons " and " fish spears," and in Job xl. 26, " a thorn." A fishing-rod, in the strict modern sense, no one could reasonably demand, though I opine that in agmoun (Isa. Iviii. 5), used in that sense in Job. xl. 26, we have the nucleus of one. Now the ancient

Hebrews were a practical body of men, and would bring a certain amount of mentality, proportional to their knowledge, to bear on operations by which they obtained their livelihood. And unless I am mistaken, they must have devised some rude instrument of wood, iron, or copper to aid them in casting their hooks from banks into the deeper parts of streams, and the mechillous referred to in Yebamoth, 121a, where the bream and jack skulked and sulked. An- other general consideration may be ad- vanced, based upon an excellent Rabbinical canon of criticism in favour of circumstantial evidence in literary problems: Im ein rahyo leddovor, zeicher leddovor. " When direct evidence is difficult to produce, indirect evidence is not to be ignored." Nevertheless in real life the rule was not allowed to govern " case law " (Yebamoth, 121a), as the following anecdote indicates ; it also proves how the Rabbins strove to .prevent bigamy, by demanding first-hand evidence of death. Two friends went a- fishing along the banks of the Jordan, and as one of them failed to return home, he was regarded as dead. Next morning at sunrise he found his way out of one of the caves where he had passed the night, and on approaching his homestead he heard loud shrieks and lamentations. Had he gone to sea and stayed away for some years his wife would not have got relief to many again, whereas had this man been drowned, search parties might have been able to recover the body in a reasonable tune.

I di not know how far this psychological trait was common to other ancient nations, but the Hebrews of Scripture and of Talmudio tunes ignored the means, and concentrated the mind on the end. So chakko (hook) necessarily had " a line," not mentioned, though it is inferred, and a handle-bar. One can hardly imagine that in Job xl. 25 the animal was attacked at close quarters with the chakko, without a pole of some kind. But in the Hebrew's judgment it was not the pole that did execution, so he did not stop to give it any credit, nor did he deem it worthy of record in the Holy Books. Yet I think I can show indications there of the presence of terms suggesting that a rod was employed.

We find several words which tacitly imply " a rod " in the Old Testament : konay, klee, and chayvel. Ezek. xl. 3, 5 provides us with knei hammiddo (measuring rod) and psil pishtim (flaxen threads). We have only to add a chakko, and we get the rudiments of our modern fishing-rods. Now let us go a step