"Two fishers, on a time, two old men, together lay and slept; they had strown the dry sea-moss for a bed in their wattled cabin, and there they lay against the leafy wall. Beside them were strewn the instruments of their toilsome hands, the fishing-creels, the rods of reed, the hooks, the sails bedraggled with sea-spoil, the lines, the weels, the lobster pots woven of rushes, the seines, two oars, and an old coble upon props. Beneath their heads was a scanty matting, their clothes, their sailor's caps. Here was all their toil, here all their wealth. The threshold no do-or did guard nor a watch-dog; all these things, all, to them seemed superfluity, for Poverty was their sentinel. They had no neighbor by them, but ever against their narrow cabin gently floated up the sea."

Long before daylight one of them awoke and aroused his companion to tell him the dream he had had. I shall quote the dream, as it graphically describes an ancient angler busy at his task: "As I was sleeping late, amid the labors, of the salt sea (and truly not too full-fed, for we supped early, if thou dost remember, and did rot overtax our bellies), I saw myself busy on a rock, and there I sat and watched the fishes, and kept spinning the bait with the rods. And, one of the fish nibbled, a fat one, for in sleep dogs dream of bread, and of fish dream I. Well, he was tightly hooked, and the blood was running, and the rod I grasped was bent with his struggle. So, with both hands, I strained and had a sore tussle for the monster. How was I ever to land so big a fish with hooks all too slim! Then, just to remind him he was hooked, I gently pricked him, pricked, and slackened, and, as he did not run, I took in line. My toil was ended with the sight of my prize; I drew up a golden, look you, a fish all plated thick with gold. Gently I unhooked him * * * then I dragged him on shore with the ropes."

I leave to the reader the pleasant task of comparing the ancient tackle With the modern. It must be said, however, that the description is rather ideal for the Mediterranean fisherman displays no science in landing his game, but simply throws it high and dry or breaks his tackle. This fact is well attested for the ancients, by several vase and, wall paintings portraying fishermen actually at work.

These paintings show us that the ancient outfit included a basket, frequently with a long handle, and a vase painting in Vienna undoubtedly suggests its use. The man has caught a fish which he is lifting straight up out of the water, at the same time he is reaching down with his basket, evidently to scoop up the fish just before it leaves the water, similar to the practice in trout fishing today.

Before passing over the Ionian Sea to observe what the Romans did in this field of activity, the quasi-scientific study of fishes among the Greeks, particularly that of Aristotle, should claim our attention. Compared with the work of the moderns Aristotle's work was crude indeed. Estimated as the first attempts at building up a science his work deserves our admiration and, in view of the fact that his writings were standard for nearly two thousand years, it demands our respect.

Aristotle did his work in natural history under the patronage of King Philip of Macedon, who drew upon the resources of the empire to provide him with rare or little known specimens from far and wide. How some of his conclusions were based on insufficient data and are consequently very inaccurate, or even grotesque, his discussion of the eel will illustrate. It must not be taken as a fair sample of his work in general. In fact, it is very unusual. "Among all the animals," he says, "which have blood, the eel is the only one which is not born of copulation or hatched from eggs. The correctness of this statement is evident from the fact that eels make their appearance in marshy bodies of water, and that, too, after all the Water has been drawn off and the mud removed, as soon as the rainwater begins to fill these lakes. They are not produced in dry weather, not even in lakes that never become dry, for they live on the rainwater. It is, therefore, plain that their origin is not due to procreation or to eggs. In spite of this some people think that they are viviparous, because worms have been found in the intestines of some eels, which they believe are the young of the eel. This opinion, however, is erroneous, for they are produced from the so-called bowels of the earth (i. e., the earth-worms), the spontaneous product of mud and moisture."

Turning now to the Romans, we find a somewhat different state of affairs, but different only on the aesthetic side; from a scientific or industrial point of view the Roman, though heir to all the Greek civilization and learning, in this, as in many other lines, made but slight advances.