began and ended. But, in general, the first evening may be said to have begun when the sun declined, and it was probably reckoned as lasting to about the ninth hour, or three o'clock of the afternoon, [b Comp. Jos. Ant. xvi. 6. 2.] Then began the period known as 'between the evenings,' which would be longer or shorter according to the season of the year, and which terminated with 'the second evening', the time from when the first star appeared to that when the third star was visible, [c OrachChajim 261.] With the night began the reckoning of the following day.
It was the 'first evening' when the disciples, whose anxiety must have been growing with the progress of time, asked the Lord to dismiss the people. But it was as they had thought. He would have them give the people to eat! Were they, then, to go and buy two hundred denarii worth of loaves? No, they were not to buy, but to give of their own store! How many loaves had they! Let them go and see. [d St. Mark vi. 38.] And when Andrew went to see what store thefisher-lad carried for them, he brought back the tidings, 'He hath five barley loaves and two small fishes,' to which he added, half in disbelief, half in faith's rising expectancy of impossible possibility: 'But what are they among so many?' [e St. John vi. 9.] It is to the fourth Evangelist alone that we owe the record of this remark, which we instinctively feel gives to the whole the touch of truth and life. It is to him also that we owe other two minute traits of deepest interest, and of far greater importance than at first sight appears.
When we read that these five were barley-loaves, we learn that, no doubt from voluntary choice, the fare of the Lord and of His followers was the poorest. Indeed, barley-bread was, almost proverbially, the meanest. Hence, as the the Mishnah puts it, while all other meat-offerings were of wheat, that brought by the woman accused of adultery was to be of barley, because (so R. Gamaliel puts it), 'as her deed is that of animals, so her offering is also of the food of animals.' [a Sotah. ii. 1.] The other minute trait in St. John's Gospel consists in the use of a peculiar word for 'fish' ( ), 'opsarion, which properly means what was eaten along with the bread, and specially refers to the small, and generally dried or pickled fish eaten with bread, like our 'sardines,' or the 'caviar' of Russia, the pickled herrings of Holland and Germany, or a peculiar kind of small dried fish, eaten with the bones, in the North of Scotland. Now just as any one who would name that fish
as eaten with bread, would display such minute knowledge of the habits of the North-east of Scotland as only personal residence could give, so in regard to the use of this term, which, be it marked, is peculiar to the Fourth Gospel, Dr. Westcott suggests, that 'it may have been a familiar Galilean word,' and his conjecture is correct, for Ophsonin ( ) derived from the same Greek word ( ), of which that used by St. John is the diminutive, means a 'savoury dish,' while Aphyan ( ) or Aphits ( ), is the term for a kind of small fish, such as sardines. The importance of tracing accurate local knowledge in the Fourth Gospel warrants our pursuing the subject further. The Talmud, declares that of all kinds of meat, fish only becomes more savoury by salting, [b Babha. B. 740 b.] and names certain kinds, specially designated as 'small fishes,' [c () Beza 16 a.] which might be eaten without being cooked. Small fishes were recommended for health; [d Ber. 40 a, near the middle.] and a kind of pickle or savoury was also made of them. Now the Lake of Galilee was particularly rich in these fishes, and we know that both the salting and pickling of them was a special industry among its fishermen. For this purpose a small kind of them were specially selected, which bear the name Terith ( ). [1 Comp. Herzfeld, Handelsgesch. pp. 305, 306. In my view he has established the meaning of this name as against Lewysohn, Zool. d. Talm. pp. 255, 256, and Levy, Neuhebr. Worterb. ii. 192 a.] Now the diminutive used by St. John ( ) of which our Authorized Version no doubt gives the meaning fairly by rendering it 'small fishes,' refers, no doubt, to those small fishes (probably a kind of sardine) of which millions were caught in the Lake, and which, dried and salted, would form the most common 'savoury' with bread for the fisher-population along the shores.
If the Fourth Gospel in the use of this diminutive displays such special Lake-knowledge as evidences its Galilean origin, another touching trait connected with its use may here be mentioned. It has already been said that the term is used only by St. John, as if to mark the Lake of Galilee origin of the Fourth Gospel. But only once again does the expression occur in the Fourth Gospel. On that morning, when the Risen One manifested Himself by the Lake of Galilee to them who had all the night toiled in vain, He had Provided for them miraculously the meal, when on the 'fire of charcoal' they saw the well-remembered 'little ish' (the opsarion), and, as He bade them bring of the 'little fish' (the Opsaria) which they had miraculously caught, Peter drew to shore the net full, not of opsaria, but 'of great fishes' (). And yet it was not of those 'great fishes' that He gave them, but 'He took the bread and gave them, and the opsarion likewise.' [a St. John xxi. 9, 10, 13.] Thus, in infinite humility, the meal at which the Risen Saviour sat down with His disciples was still of 'bread and small fishes', even though He gave them, the draught of large fishes; and so at that last meal He recalled that first miraculous feeding by the Lake of Galilee. And this also is one of those undesigned, too often unobserved traits in the narrative, which yet carry almost irresistible evidence.
There is one proof at least of the implicit faith or rather trust of the disciples in their Master. They had given Him account of their own scanty provision, and yet, as He bade them make the people sit down to the meal, they hesitated not to obey. We can picture it to ourselves, what is so exquisitely sketched: the expanse of'grass.' [ b St. Mattxiv. 19.] 'green,' and fresh, [c 'St. Mark vi. 39.] 'much grass;' [d St. John vi. 10 .] then the people in their 'companies' [e St. Mark vi. 39.] of fifties and hundreds, reclining, [f St. Luke ix. 14.] and looking in their regulare divisions, and with their bright many-coloured dresses, like 'garden-beds' [g St. Mark vi. 40.] [The literal rendering of is 'garden-bed.' In Mark vi. 40, 'garden-beds, garden-beds.' In the A. V. 'in ranks.'] on the turf. But One Figure must every eye have been bent. Around Him stood His Apostles. They had laid before
Him the scant provision made for their own wants, and which was now to feed their great multitude. As was wont at meals, on the part of the head of the household, Jesus took the bread, 'blessed' [h Ber.46 a.]or, as St. John puts it, 'gaves thanks,' [2 and 'brake' it. The expression recalls that connected with the Holy Eucharist, and leaves little doubt on the mind that, in the Discourse delivered in the Synagogue of Capernaum, [i St. John.] there is also reference to the Lord's Supper. As of comparatively secondary importance, yet helping us better to realise the scene, we recall the Jewish ordinance, that the Head of the meal, yet if they who sat down to it were not merly guests, but his children, or his household, then might he speak it, even if he himself did not partake of the bread which he had broken, [a Rosh haSh 29 b.]
We can scarcely be mistaken as to the words which Jesus spake when 'He gave thanks.'The Jewish Law [b Sot. vii. 1.] allows the grace at meat to be said, not obly in Hebrew, but in any language, the Jerusalem Talmud aptly remarking, that it was proper a person should understand to Whom he was giving thanks ( ). [c Jer. Sot. p. 21 b .] Similarly, we have very distinct information as regards a case like the present. We gather, that the use of'savoury' with bread was specially common around the Lake of Galilee, and the Mishnah lays down the principle, that if bread and 'savory' were eaten, it would depend which of the two was the main article of diet, to determine whether 'thanks-giving should be said for one or the other. In any case only one benediction was to be used, [d In this case, of course, it would be spoken over the berad, the 'savory' being merly an addition. There can be liottle doubt, therefore, that the words which Jesus spake, whether in Aramaean, Greek, or Hebrew, were those so well known: 'Blessed art Thou, Jehovah our God, King of the world, Who causes to come forth () bread from the earth.' Assuredly it was this threefold thought: the upward thought (sursum corda), the recognition of the creative act as regards every piece of bread we eat, and the thanksgiving, which was realised anew in all its fulness, when, as He distributed to the desciples, the provision miraculously multiplied in His Hands. And still they bore it from His Hands from company to company, laying before each a store. When they were all filled, He that had provided the meal bade them gather up the fragments before each company. So doing, each of the twelve had his basket filled. Here also we have another life-touch. Those 'baskets' ( ), known in Jewish writings by a similar name (kephiphah), made of wicker or willows [1 Not an Egyptian basket, as even Jost translates in his edition of the Mishnah. The word is derived from (Metser), wicker or willow).] ( ) were in common use, nut considered of the poorest kind, [e Comp. Sotah. ii. 1.] There is a sublimeness of contrast that passes descraiption between this feast to the five thousand, besides women and children and the poor's provision of barley bread and the two small fishes; and, again, between the quantity left and the coarse wicker baskets in which it was stored. Nor do we forget to draw mantally the parallel between this Messianic feast and that banquet of'the latter days ' which Ranninism pictured so realistically. But as the wondering multitude watched, as the disciples gaathered from company to company the fragments into their baskets, the murmur ran through the ranks: 'This is truly the Prophet, 'This is truly the Prophet, 'the coming One' (habba, ) into the world.' And so the Baptist's last inquiry, 'Art Thou the Coming One?' [1 See the meaning of that expression in the previouschapter.] was fully and publicly answered, and that by the Jews themselves.
THE ASCENT: FROM THE RIVER JORDAN TO THE MOUNT OF TRANSFIGURATION
THE NIGHT OF MIRACXLES ON THE LAKE OF GENNESARENT. CHAPTER XXX.
St. Matt. xiv. 22-36; St. John 15-21.) THE last question of the Baptist, spoken in public, had been: 'Art Thou the Coming One, or look we for another?' It had, in part, been answered, as the murmur had passed through the ranks: 'This One is truly the Prophet, the Coming One!' So, then, they had no longer to wait, nor to look for another!
