The 'Little Fisherman' and the Fish he Holds

The fish are depicted with such great accuracy that they can be identified as the species Coryphaena hippurus, or common dolphinfish. As a large pelagic fish, up to 200 cm. in length, the common dolphinfish requires special skill in fishing, so it is more likely that the catch held by the "Little Fisherman' was caught by the boy's father or other older members of the family; and the scene depicted may represent a commemorative picture, rather like photographs of such occasions nowadays. Very likely, the Theran fishermen were aware of the habit of the fish of clustering below floating objects or boats and of other seasonal and migratory habits, so that fishing would have been relatively easy and undoubtedly very profitable, as this fish may be considered a delicacy. The accurate representation of animals on Theran frescoes leads to the conclusion that these, even including exotic ones, were depicted straight from nature, probably from the landscape around Thera or from drawings made in some sub-tropical land.

INTRODUCTION

It is generally accepted that in the wall paintings of Thera, as well as those of Minoan Crete, animals are represented with great fidelity. As a result of the indisputable skill of the artists who produced some of these masterpieces, the animals are depicted with such accuracy that any specialist on the matter can quite easily recognise the species. With regard to the fish drawings in particular, much interesting information is provided about the size of the specimens and thus about the effectiveness of the fishing methods, the abundance of some species then as compared with our own era, the habitats in which they were available, and the relationships between fish and people in terms, for example, of the importance of fishing as an economic activity. Some interesting questions are also raised. Do all those wall paintings which represent animals depict usual or unusual, daily or seasonal scenes? Are they narrntive scenes like, for instance, the frescoes in Byzantine churches, or are they a kind of mural journal aunouncing an exceptional event? Are they related to religion or not, and do they carry a particular meaning?

In the following paper, the wall painting of the 'Little Fisherman' holding two strings of fish will be discussed. This painting can be considered one of the best known from Akrotiri and a potential source of some interesting deductions. Our point of view in looking at this picture and other related ones should be that of a biologist, bearing in mind the almost invariable behaviour of any biological system in the time scale of history or prehistory.  

THE PICTURE

The picture represents a young fisherman holding two strings of fish, one in each hand (Pl. 5). The string in his left hand contains five fish and that in his right hand seven fish, so that the boy carries twelve fish in all. Ten are quite small, and two, one in each hand and partly covered by the others, are large. This is undoubtedly quite a heavy load, and the artist conveys this by giving a remarkable detail: the twine on which the fish are threaded, which can clearly be seen wound around the fingers of the left hand (Pl. 6). The weight of all these fish can be estimated approximately according to the following calculations. If the height of the boy is about 120 cm., then the length of the ten smaller fish varies from about 27 to 37 cm., while, of the two biggest, that in the righthand string is about 50 cm. long, and that in the lefthand string about 60 cm.. It can be supposed that the small fish weigh on average 1 to 1.5 kilos each, while the large fish in the left hand is about 3-4 kilos and that in the right hand about 2-3 kilos. Thus, the 'Little Fisherman' carries a weight of about 8-12 kilos in his right hand and nearly 7-10 kilos in his left hand. The difference between the weights carried by the two hands is acceptable, given that most people are right-handed. The total weight of about 18-20 kilos seems rather much for a young boy, which is probably why his head is bent slightly downwards and his arms are in a rigid position. The twine holding the fish is not particularly thick but is twisted between the fingers, giving enough resistance to support such a weight. Only a small part of the twine is visible beneath each of the boy's palms, and as a result only the topmost fish of each string seems to be connected to the twine, while the others appear as though they are floating in the air (Pl. 6). This is perhaps an arbitrary simplification on the part of the painter, in order to avoid too much complexity in the drawing.

The accurate depiction of animals, including fish, demands a great deal of time and attentive observation. It should also be noted that the painter ought to have the animal in front of his eyes, if the subjects are not to be presented as caricatures rather than faithful portrayals. The latter is characteristic of some European pre-Renaissance paintings of scenes of the Holy Family and landscapes from Palestine, in which the painters made camels, for instance, resemble horses because they had never seen the real thing.

THE FISH

The fish featured in the picture can be classified without doubt as belonging to the family Coryphaenidae and to the species Coryphaena hippurus or common dolphinfish, which is known in Greek seas under the names κυνηγός, λαγός, σύρτης, λαγιάδα, λαμπούγα and μανάλι  (Economidis 1973, 514), some of which are of Italian or Spanish origin. Another species, Coryphaena equiselis or pompano dolphinfish, is also observed in Greek seas, but very rarely. These species are the exclusive representatives of this family, distributed throughout almost all tropical and temperate ocean zones and in closely related seas. The principal characteristics which distinguish these two species are: (a) the body of the common dolphinfish is shallower, its greatest depth (H) being equal to, or less than, 25% of the standard length (SL) of the body, while in the pompano dolphinfish this depth is equal to, or more than, 25%; (b) the dorsal fin of the former species has 58 to 66 rays, while in the latter species this number varies from 52 to 59; (c) the lateral line has, respectively, more than 200 scales and less than 200 scales; and (d) the free margin of the anal fin of Coryphaena hippurus is concave, while in Coryphaena equiselis it is convex (Fig.1). The specimens held by the 'Little Fisherman' have a really quite shallow body, and the anal fin, where visible, has a relatively concave free margin, thus indicating that these are Coryphaena hippurus. Moreover, the colours of live specimens of the species are very bright, varying from blue to blue-green on the upper part of the body and from whitish to yellow on the lower part (Fig. 2). These colours can quite easily be recognised in the picture. It seems that the only free artistic invention made by the painter of the 'Little Fisherman' is the presence of two rows of black spots, visible in all the depicted specimens (Pl. 6), which are absent from the live fish. Probably, the painter wanted to draw the two existing intermediate zones in the body colours, one near the first row of spots between the dark blue of the upper part of the body and the lighter blue to blue-green of the sides, and the other between this and the whitish to yellow colour of the belly. There are some black or blue spots on live specimens, but these are dispersed irregularly along the sides (Bauchot 1987, 1070-1071).

The species was identified some time ago, not long after the discovery of the wall painting of the 'Little Fisherman' (see Sahrhage and Lundbeck 1992, 42, 44 fig. 30; Mylona this volume).

The common dolphinfish is large, extending up to 200 cm. in length, though specimens of 50-100 cm. are more usual. On the other hand, the pompano dolphinfish is quite small, never surpassing 75 cm. in length, and usually around 50 cm.. Both species are epipelagic, inhabiting open waters, though they can also approach the coast. They feed on epipelagic organisms, especially flying fish, crustaceans and squid (Tortonese 1975, 178-179). When hunting shoals of prey, they very often jump out of the water, sometimes even onto the beach. Strange behaviour, such as following ships and clustering below floating objects (Collette 1986, 845-846), including small boats (Lythgoe and Lythgoe 1992, 104-105), has also been reported. Such antics may give us a key to explaining the undoubtedly abundant and presumably exceptional catch carried in the hands of the 'Little Fisherman'.

THE FISHERMAN

It is difficult, if not impossible, to accept that the boy is carrying fish which he has caught himself. Even allowing for the fact that customs and abilities change over the centuries, it is highly unlikely that such an exceptional catch was made either by chance or by design by one or more boys. We are probably looking at a record of a special event of the sort that might be recorded nowadays in photographs; and it seems more likely that the fish held by the 'Little Fisherman' were caught by someone else, most probably his father or other members of his family. If we follow G.A. Gaballa's view that "a story is a specific event carried out by particular characters in a particular place at a particular time" (Gaballa 1976, 5, quoted in Doumas 1992, 24), then we might plausibly conjecture that the 'Little Fisherman's' family wished to record a very special success in fishing by commissioning a painter to create a monumental picture. All the same, it is perhaps more likely that the scene is a comparatively ordinary one, since catches of common dolphinfish would not have been uncommon even in this era (see below). Moreover, it should be noted that it is quite difficult to depict a rare fish with accuracy. It is also noteworthy that the barely perceptible smile on the 'Little Fisherman's' face betrays an obvious satisfaction. In addition, his beautiful dark skin and svelte boy's body indicate a figure in the bloom of health, which perhaps enhanced his family's social prestige.

FISH SPECIES AND POPULATION

It is generally accepted that the riches of the sea were far more abundant in the time of the 'Little Fisherman' than they are today. The smaller human population and the primitive fishing tackle in comparison with the sophisticated methods used nowadays both put less pressure on fish populations, while the almost complete absence of pollution and the restricted capability to fish in open waters kept fish populations denser than they are now. Consequently, it is very likely that fishing will have been much easier and more effective, and that fresh fish will have been an important source of food as well as providing the raw material for various other productive activities. As D. Mylona (this volume) has pointed out, in the excavations at Akrotiri bones of many fish species are found, especially coastal and benthic ones, which were and are frequent in the waters around Thera. She also notes the lack of bones of common dolphinfish, which leads her to hypothesise that this fish was rarely fished, and that an exceptional catch of it was something worthy of celebration by depiction in the 'Little Fisherman' fresco. This view is one which appears to arise from the archaeological evidence. On the other hand, given that the bones of common dolphinfish are relatively soft, it could reasonably be assumed that they would not survive for thirty-seven centuries. The lack of these bones in the excavation record should thus not be attributed to the rarity of this fish as food, but rather to the fragility and perishability of the bones themselves. Moreover, given that the fish is regarded as a delicacy, it was probably not for common consumption but eaten by the rich rather than the poor. All these factors suggest that fishing for common dolphinfish would have been an ordinary pursuit and probably very profitable.

FISHING AND FISHING TACKLE

The common dolphinfish is caught in the Mediterranean using seines, trammel nets, trail-lines and drift long-lines, mainly in the south (Cyprus, Malta, Tunisia) (Bauchot 1987, 1070-1071). In Malta, it is caught with circled nets, which exploit its habit of congregating under floating objects. A similar method is used nowadays in the Saronic gulf, in the area around the small village of Isthmia. During summer, mainly from August to September, fishermen place a kind of reed float, about 2 x 2 m. in area, quite close to the coast. As small shoals or single common dolphinfish pass under this floating object, the fishermen start to catch them using a trail-line. Of interest is the fact that the fishermen do not haul in the first catch of fish before the second one and so on subsequently, because experience shows that this avoids frightening the other fish swimming around. There is reliable information that sometimes the catch is abundant, fifty or more fish per day. The use of purse seines is equally effective.

Clearly, this is a very old method of catching common dolphinfish in the Mediterranean, and we cannot exclude the possibility that it could have been practised since the time of the 'Little Fisherman'. Observations of the behaviour of this fish were surely made very early on in the history of the inhabitants of the Mediterranean coasts. Methods using either nets or lines could equally well have been employed in the period to which the 'Little Fisherman' belongs.

DEPICTING ANIMALS

A zoologist looking at the wall paintings of Thera, even superficially, observes the fauna and habitats with the eyes of a specialist, and can probably help archaeologists to find better solutions to their difficult and sometimes apparently intractable problems. With this in mind, some general remarks on the representation of animals in the wall paintings of Thera seem pertinent.

As noted above, painting animals demands great accuracy on the part of the artist. Otherwise, the animals will not be recognisable, and their presence would thus become more symbolic than naturalistic. Indeed, it seems that both modes were adopted by early human societies, depending on their needs. However, as many specialists on the matter have remarked, Theran mural art has a pronouncedly naturalistic character (see Doumas 1992, 22), and even when the unknown artists endeavour to give their creatures a symbolic aspect, the persons, objects and scenes are more or less easily recognisable. The question raised by the wall paintings which feature animals is whether or not they are drawn from life. Before attempting to answer this, it is useful to note that the painters must have studied the animals and plants they depicted in some detail, in order to render them so accurately (Doumas 1992, 27). Therefore, either they were trained to do this, or they were foreign painters, for example of Egyptian origin. Nevertheless, the question continues to demand further investigation, not least because the opinions expressed (Doumas 1992, 27) stop short of tackling it fully. For instance, the presence in some wall paintings of 'exotic' animals and plants, such as lions and palms, can be explained in two ways. (a) The artist visited a sub-tropical land such as Syria, Palestine or Egypt, saw such animals and plants there, and remembered them so vividly that when he returned home he was able to depict them from memory, at the same time applying the techniques and style of his 'school'. Although this view cannot be rejected completely, it seems fairly improbable. A more logical assumption would be that the artist brought back from his voyages to exotic lands a number of 'notes' and/or 'designs', and that Theran citizens or authorities asked him to depict the wonderful things he had seen in a kind of narrative picture. Such a theory is plausible, despite the numerous difficulties which include, for example, the lack of paper for designs and notes. Perhaps Egyptian or Syrian papyrus was used, or the very fine material of Thera? The second explanation (b) is that the artist living on Thera was familiar with a landscape more tropical than that of today, and that his pictures were representative of his homeland. In many respects, this view is not too far from reality, especially when one considers the landscapes close to Thera, including southern parts of continental Greece and Asia Minor. These regions probably had certain sub-tropical characteristics at this time, such as the presence of large land predators like lions and panthers. These need sizeable herds of herbivores, which in turn need denser and richer flora and vegetation. The paintings furnish such information about the animals and plants of regions adjacent to the Aegean, for which the excavated data provide no evidence (Doumas 1992, 27).

-----------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------