But according to Ælian, IX. 51, the Mullet (τρίγλη) was held by the initiates of the Eleusinian Mysteries in the greatest honour, for one or other of two curious reasons: the first, because it brings forth its young thrice a year[378], and second, because it eats the sea-hare, who bears death to man.[379] Nonnius (p. 81) informs us that the followers of Pythagoras were forbidden to eat the _Scarus_ because it was τρυγηφάγος, _i.e._ an eater of grain or grapes, whence or how obtained he vouchsafes not to inform us.[380] It is of interest to read in Faber (_op. cit._, p. 27) that the common seal (_Phoca vitulina_) is believed at the present time to go ashore in the Ombla Valley in quest of _grapes_ during the vintage, and is also said to commit great havoc in the vineyards of Sardinia and Sicily! But for once Nonnius naps! Although, according to tradition, Pythagoras proscribed all fish, three kinds only are expressly and by name forbidden (in Symbols 18, 19, 60), _viz._ the _Melanurus_, the _Erythinius_, and the _Sepia_; nothing is said about the _Scarus_. I presume that the error arose from Nonnius confusing a passage in Plutarch (_Symp._, VIII. 8, 3.) where _à propos_ of Pythagoras, τρυγηφάγος is associated with the _Scarus_, but in exactly the opposite sense, “for we can _not_ call the Mullet corn-destroying, or the _Scarus_ grape-eating,” etc. Again our Nonnius! By a passage from Pliny, XXXII. 3, he attempts to clear the _Scarus_ and throw the blame for cholera on the Mullet. But Pliny distinctly states that alone of all _animals_ the fish called the Mullet, when he can annex no other food, eats the sea-hare without fatal consequences, after which he “tenerescit tantum et ingratior[381] viliorque fit.” These Mullet, sold by fraudulent fishermen as _Scari_, caused the indictment of Diphilus. Rondolet bears witness that near Massilia similar sales took place “ab imperitis piscatoribus,” but surely “too skilled” would be the better epithet. It is but fair to add that Athen., VIII. 51, asserts that the _Scarus_ also eats the sea-hare. For this long discursus, the repute of the _Scarus_, the disputes of epicures and of doctors whether it be a dainty, or a sound diet, and the exclusive properties attributed to it by Greek and Roman writers must be my excuse. Summarising these last, we find that the _Scarus_, in addition to being the most passionate in his love[382], _alone of all fishes_, (A) Is not a cannibal, but a vegetarian (Pliny, IX. 29). Oppian claims for the _mugil_—grey mullet—that it is the only non-carnivorous fish (II. 642-3). Couch gives as his considered opinion, “_Mugil capito_ is the _only_ fish of which I am able to express my belief that it usually selects for its food nothing that has life.” Modern authorities have established that the _scarus_ feeds on molluscs also. (B) Seems to ruminate or does ruminate.[383] (C) Belongs to,