DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49270#0334
Ancient Egyptian Fishing
247
and were not wholly unknown in the XVIII Dynasty, though they had then become rare
and of a form different from that of the earlier types (fig. 105). The forms of the hooks
seen in the “gang” depicted in the tomb of Gem-ni-kai (fig. 103) is identical with some of
those just mentioned (cf. figs. 90, 91), and in the hands of a vendor represented in another
Old Kingdom scene 177 are three large hooks — the size is probably somewhat exaggerated
by the artist — of the angular pattern (fig. 229; cf. figs. 95, 96, 97). The unbarbed type as
it occurs in the Middle Kingdom is hardly distinguishable from some of the older examples
(fig. 98, 99, 100) except in the unique and doubtful case of the hook here reproduced in
fig. 104. This object, made of bronze and of a flat cross section, is described as a fishhook
by E. Naville, who recorded its discovery at Deir el-Bahri.178 It is difficult to dispute
this identification if the object really belongs to the period to which Naville attributes it,
but if it belonged to Graeco-Roman times one would have no hesitation in describing it
as one of those implements, so common in the late classical period, which served to catch
and pull up the wick of a lamp.179 It is therefore better to suspend judgment in this case
until further evidence has accumulated. The decline of the barbless hook is seen in the
New Kingdom example already cited (fig. 105) — a late case which is not unquestionable,
as it is possible that the hook may have had a poorly worked barb which has rusted away.
Barbed hooks first appear in Egypt in the XII Dynasty (fig. 101, 102). The heads
of these hooks are like those earlier ones with stops made by turning over the extremity
of the shanks. The curves of the bends are rounded-angular, and the barbs are well
developed and suitably placed. With slightly modified proportions these hooks last on
through the New Kingdom (figs. 106, 107 — XVIII Dyn.), and even into the Late Period,
when they appear in iron on the Graeco-Egyptian sites like Naucratis and Daphnae (figs.
113, 114, 115 — XXVI Dyn.). The New Kingdom hooks are regularly barbed, but com-
paratively few of them are headed up, like those in figs. 106, 107, in the older fashion.
Instead, the end of the shank is expanded slightly by hammering so as to form a small
flange in a plane at right angles to that of the hook (cf. figs. 116, 120). A line bent on the
shank below this flange and drawn hard up against it, is less liable to chafe through than
one made fast to a hook of the earlier type. In some cases the flanges of the heads were
very slight, and in many they have disappeared from weathering, but in well preserved
hooks they are clearly visible (fig. 111). The New Kingdom fishhooks (figs. 105-112)
are well designed, generally speaking, but their barbs are often less intelligently placed
177 The scene in question has been discussed by G. Maspero ‘Sur une representation de bazar cgyptien ramontent
a 1’ancien-empire’ (Etudes de mythologie et d’archeologie egyptiennes, vol. 4, Paris, 1900, p. 256).
178 E. Naville et ah, The Xlth Dynasty temple at Deir el Bahari, pt. 3, p. 26.
179 C. J. Toutain, ‘Lucerna, Lychnus’ (Daremberg and Saglio, Diet, des antiq., vol. 3, p. 2, p. 1322 and fig. 4597,
p. 1328).
247
and were not wholly unknown in the XVIII Dynasty, though they had then become rare
and of a form different from that of the earlier types (fig. 105). The forms of the hooks
seen in the “gang” depicted in the tomb of Gem-ni-kai (fig. 103) is identical with some of
those just mentioned (cf. figs. 90, 91), and in the hands of a vendor represented in another
Old Kingdom scene 177 are three large hooks — the size is probably somewhat exaggerated
by the artist — of the angular pattern (fig. 229; cf. figs. 95, 96, 97). The unbarbed type as
it occurs in the Middle Kingdom is hardly distinguishable from some of the older examples
(fig. 98, 99, 100) except in the unique and doubtful case of the hook here reproduced in
fig. 104. This object, made of bronze and of a flat cross section, is described as a fishhook
by E. Naville, who recorded its discovery at Deir el-Bahri.178 It is difficult to dispute
this identification if the object really belongs to the period to which Naville attributes it,
but if it belonged to Graeco-Roman times one would have no hesitation in describing it
as one of those implements, so common in the late classical period, which served to catch
and pull up the wick of a lamp.179 It is therefore better to suspend judgment in this case
until further evidence has accumulated. The decline of the barbless hook is seen in the
New Kingdom example already cited (fig. 105) — a late case which is not unquestionable,
as it is possible that the hook may have had a poorly worked barb which has rusted away.
Barbed hooks first appear in Egypt in the XII Dynasty (fig. 101, 102). The heads
of these hooks are like those earlier ones with stops made by turning over the extremity
of the shanks. The curves of the bends are rounded-angular, and the barbs are well
developed and suitably placed. With slightly modified proportions these hooks last on
through the New Kingdom (figs. 106, 107 — XVIII Dyn.), and even into the Late Period,
when they appear in iron on the Graeco-Egyptian sites like Naucratis and Daphnae (figs.
113, 114, 115 — XXVI Dyn.). The New Kingdom hooks are regularly barbed, but com-
paratively few of them are headed up, like those in figs. 106, 107, in the older fashion.
Instead, the end of the shank is expanded slightly by hammering so as to form a small
flange in a plane at right angles to that of the hook (cf. figs. 116, 120). A line bent on the
shank below this flange and drawn hard up against it, is less liable to chafe through than
one made fast to a hook of the earlier type. In some cases the flanges of the heads were
very slight, and in many they have disappeared from weathering, but in well preserved
hooks they are clearly visible (fig. 111). The New Kingdom fishhooks (figs. 105-112)
are well designed, generally speaking, but their barbs are often less intelligently placed
177 The scene in question has been discussed by G. Maspero ‘Sur une representation de bazar cgyptien ramontent
a 1’ancien-empire’ (Etudes de mythologie et d’archeologie egyptiennes, vol. 4, Paris, 1900, p. 256).
178 E. Naville et ah, The Xlth Dynasty temple at Deir el Bahari, pt. 3, p. 26.
179 C. J. Toutain, ‘Lucerna, Lychnus’ (Daremberg and Saglio, Diet, des antiq., vol. 3, p. 2, p. 1322 and fig. 4597,
p. 1328).