Some days I actually learn something from Facebook strangers, and it makes a connection with some experience.
Yesterday there was a repost of a short article of how some female frogs will pretend to be dead to discourage unwanted attention from males. It is among the few species that will play possum.
As soon as I read that I recalled an eerie experience.
I had hiked deep into Dante’s dark woods in the Apennines when I happened upon this peculiar and eerie phenomenon of nature that has long puzzled me, until I read the article.
The trail followed a stream through dense woods, then at one point rounded a small dark pool, about 15 below at the bottom of an embankment too steep and slippery to climb. A small waterfall from the stream above landed into the pool.
It was there that a monstrous frog floated lifelessly on its back. She looked bloated to me, but her color was bright, and she was larger than any frog I have ever seen, about the size of a melon, floating on her back, circling, slowly circling, around the wake of the waterfall.
I would have investigated and photographed if the bank were not so precarious. I was alone, so I did not risk a descent into this dark pool. A difficult balancing act, that would be. There was no Virgil to guide me.
It was, after all, near where Dante set the gate to Hell.

Roy Scarbrough Romantic notions about nature is a fairly recent attitude in western thought. It was most often considered frightening. Once you walked beyond the walls and gates of a fortified town, you were pray for animals and robbers. Crimes were often punished with exile. Dante was one of those so punished.
An exception was Leonardo Da Vinci, who loved traipsing out among mountains and streams. Some of his paintings show sublime and wild landscapes in the backgrounds.
E. Writer That's because people fear what they don't understand and ancient people had limited understanding of nature beyond its hardships and mysteries. Ancient people thought the sun revolved around earth or that their deities controlled the stars and the sky, or even thought that an eclipse signaled the end of the world. People took what they needed to build or eat and that was the end of it. No room to observe nature or appreciate its magnificence beyond the hardships of their time. So I don't think admiration of nature as romantic, but as a sound intellectual appreciation of nature's brilliance, power, and beauty. Every time I'm in my garden I'm admiring how a beautiful little flower can produce a fruit, like a tomato. Da Vinci's landscapes could be said to show nature in a very romantic "light."
Alex Morton Eastern thought immersed itself in the beauty and serenity and acceptance of nature as is clear in the Chinese poets of a couple of thousand years ago, Li Po and Tu Fu, and of course the taoism of Lao Tsu while Western thought, so many years later, in the nineteenth century, was mired in trying to decode nature ... ie, Tennyson's "nature red in tooth and claw" in an effort to rationalize the chasm between what is expected of a world in the arms of a god who allows the ultimate cruelty of death and preaches love in the same breath. This, in the mid to late nineteenth century when naturalists were cataloguing the flora and fauna of the world and reveling in it. Then along came Darwin and that really confused the issue. Suddenly, there was a structure beyond the cataloging ... something that tied it all together outside of the idea of an overarching god creating it all in one fell swoop. Imagine the turmoil in 1842 when dinosaur fossils were first brought to the attention of the world and the name created in 1858?
Alex Morton Speaking of nature red in tooth and claw, just when I was feeling all philosophical and comfortable, a huge black bear wandered down our driveway. Probably on his way to a spot near the sea where the blackberries are just starting to ripen. He took his time, just ambled along, sure of himself as the king of the mountain. Eventually, he vanished into a clump of bushes and like some magical being, never reappeared. He must have crossed the road, somewhere, but not that I saw.
E. Writer Alex we might argue about dinosaurs. I don't believe in the concept of dinosaurs. Prehistoric animals, yes, animals existed. Giant voracious violent lizards roaming the planet, all dying in one fell swoop is science fiction. It was less exciting than that. Trex and chicken share a genetic ancestor. Birds are reptiles and direct descendants. The size of these fossilized materials (the organic material is no longer there, just the minerals) is due to hundreds of thousands to millions of years of sedimentation. Some animals were large like woolly mammoth which is a relative of the Asian elephant. Lots of science fiction in dinosaurs which I feel is an 18th century invention from the imagination of some very shady men https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/brontosaurus-reinstating-a-prehistoric-icon.html