Eels

vol. I p.1-4

Eels

The eel (ἔγχελυς, anguilla), ie, anguilla vulgaris, was one of the most famous and most loved river fish in antiquity, which was also however consistently despised. It was even named by Homer (Il. XXI 203. 353). In the History of Animals, Aristotle describes it as a long and flat fish (h. a. I 5. II 13. 15) with two fins (I 5 p. 489 b 26; cf. de incessu an. 7 p. 708 a 3 and Plin. n. h. IX 73), four narrow gills in a row on each side (II 13 p. 505a 14), <10> a small stomach (VIII 2 p. 592a 11) surrounded by fat (III 15 p. 520a 23), an oesophagus (II 17 p. 507a 10), and a gall bladder found close by the liver (II 15 p. 506b 9). Aristotle dedicates a particular section (VI 16; cf. IV 11 p. 538a 1) to the problem of reproduction in the eel, which was often handled. In his opinion, it was a hermaphrodite and had neither sperm nor ovaries (cf. III 10 p. 517b 7. VI 13 p. 569a 5. Plin. n. h. X 189), <20> it was born from itself in putrid sludge (ἐκ τῶν καλουμένων γῆς ἐντέρων; cf. de gen. an. III 11 p. 762b 21. Theophr. de pisc. in sicco deg. 9. Plut. quaest. conv. II 3 p. 637f.). Aristotle was very much against those who claimed that they had found live fry - which he often explained as intestinal worms - near eels. ‘Male’ eels were distinguished from ‘female’ eels with their longer heads (IV 11 p. 538a 10), <30> and the latter tasted better (VIII 30 p. 608a 5): however, you have to assume two different species are being talked about here. According to Aubert and Wimmer, in Aristotle’s History of Animals I 127, 15 he probably meant the anguilla acutirostris and the anguilla latirostris with that. In contrast to Aristotle’s History of Animals, Pseudo-Aristotle in Athenaios VII 298c (Rose Aristot. pseud. 305) says ὀχεύονται δὲ συμπλεκόμεναι κᾆτ’ ἀφιᾶσι γλοιῶδεσ ἐξ αὑτῶν ὅ γενόμενον ἐν τῇ ἰλύι ζωογονεῖται. <40> Oppian hal. I 516 follows him. Another take is in Plin. n. h. IX 160 anguillae atterunt se scopulis; ea strigmenta vivescunt, nec alia est earum procreatio [eels rub themselves against rocks; that which is scraped off becomes alive, and they have no other way of procreation]. They were aware that eels left the rivers to go into the sea (VI 13 p. 569 a 8; cf. Galen. VI 795. Plin. n. h. XXXII 145. Archestratos in Athenaios VII 298e). VII 2 p. 591b 30 is about how they eat and how they live: they mostly live on water, and need clear water because of their small gills, <page break 1/2> they spend the days in the deeps and swim around at night. They can last for about 5 to 6 days on dry land (cf. Theophr. de pisc. in sicco deg. 10), they live to about 7 to 8 years (p. 592a 14.23, written out in Plin. n. h. IX 74, cf. 177). In I 5 p. 489b 29 it says that they move forward by wriggling like a snake (cf. de part. an. IV 13 p. 696a 5ff. Plin. n. h. IX 73). Aristotle could give such good information about the fish, <10> since there were specific eel-breeders (ἐγχελυτρόφοι) (VIII 2 p. 592a 2. Athen. VII 298b), who bred the fish in eel-tanks (ἐγχελυῶνες), which they placed [the eels] in during winter (VIII 2 p. 592a 15). In order to keep the water as clean as possible despite the uncleanliness and climatic conditions of the very sensitive animal, the tanks were whitewashed or lined with broad flat stones, and had a constant flow of water through them (VIII 2 p. 592a 2). <20>

The most common way to catch them was to agitate water and mud so that the eels, easily coerced because of their thin gills, came to the surface (VIII 2 p. 592a 6. Athen. VII 298b). This is where the term ἐγχέλεις θηρώμενος (Aristoph. equ. 860. Suidas) comes from, to describe people who “fished in troubled waters”. Since the rivers and seas were especially agitated by storms in the autumn, this was the best time to catch [eels]. <30> Like in Strymon (VIII 2) and in the lacus Benacus (Lake Garda), where, at the effluent of Mincius into devices especially used for this purpose (excipula), ‘eel-tubes’, they were caught every year in October in groups of thousands (Plin. h. n. IX 75). People also used to set up tuna-containers drenched in brine, in the opening of which people deposited the so-called sieve (τὸν καλούμενον ἠθμόν IV 8 p. 534a 20), likely some sort of fish trap. The Geoponica XX 14 and 23 (cf. also XX 7, 1) give specific recipes for bait. <40> The method of catching, which Aelian h. a. XIV 8 and Oppian hal. IV 450 describe, was peculiar, and it was used mostly in the river Ἠρέταινος in Vicetia in upper-Italy. The fishermen threw a long sheep intestine into the water; when an eel grabbed this, the fisherman would blow as hard as they could into the intestine in order to stun the eel which was holding onto the bait, and to drag it out of the water frantically holding on to the bait. <page break 2/3> The most splendid eels (μεγέθει μέγισται καὶ ἐσθίειν ἥδισται Paus. IX 24, 1) in Greece came from Lake Copais in Boeotia (evidenced in Athen. VII cap. 50-56. Antiphanes ebenda fr. 236 Kock. Aristoph. Lysistr. 36. Ath. II 71c. Paus. loc. cit. Pollux VI 63. Nonnus Dionys. XIII 64), where they still thrive in this century [the 1800s] (Ulrich’s Reisen und Forsch. 200). They were sent from Thebes (Ephippos fr. 15 Kock) and no foodie’s table in Athens was without [this eel], <10> where they were sorely missed during the Peloponnesian War (τερπνότατον τέμαχος ἀνθρώποις Aristoph. Acharn. 880; Pax 1005). At that time, they cost three drachma each (Acharn. 962). In the market-excise-tax, the amount for eels was different to that of other fish (Schol. B on Il. XXI 203). The largest eels from Lake Copais were formally crowned by the Boeotians like four-footed sacrificial animals, and were slaughtered for the gods (Agatharchides in Athen. VII 297d [FHG III 192]). <20> The eels of Strymon came in second place (Aristot. VIII 2. cf. above Archestratos in Athen. VII 298e and Ptolemaios Physkon ebenda II 71b. Antiphanes fr. 105 Kock). Hikesios in Athen. VII 298b says that people salted the “macedonian” eels. Archestratos in Athen. VII 298e ranks these two kinds of eel as being on a par with, or even inferior to, the eel from the Sicilian strait, which however isn’t mentioned elsewhere. <30> Apart from Greece, the Karkheh River (Choaspes), on which Susa was situated, had a good reputation [for eels] (Antimachos fr. 56 Kock). According to Ptolemaios Physkon in Athen. II 71 bc, the river Lathon flowing into the Gulf of Sidra contained the so-called king eels, which were one and a half times as big as the Macedonian and the Boeotian eels. In the Ganges, eels which were 30 feet long were supposed to have been seen (Plin. h. n. IX 4). Here, <40> he was talking about the great eel-fishing in upper-Italy, which is now the most powerful in the Po-lagoons near Comacchio. Naturally, there were many other cities of the same kind (Demetrios of Skepsis in Athen. VII 300 b; an eel from the Maiandros ebenda 299c in Semonides). In the time of the Roman empire, the eel was seen as a dish for a mean man (Iuven. V 103). Just as we tend to serve eel with dill, so too did the Greeks tend to serve eel with chard (τεῦτλον, σεῦτλον) (Aristoph. Acharn. 894; Pax 1014. Eubulos fr. 35-37 Kock. Pherekrates in Pollux VI 59); <50> for this, the fish was wrapped in chard leaves. The doctors weren’t agreed upon the digestibility and the nutritional value of its flesh; while Hikesios (Athen. VII 298b) thought it was better than all other fish, Galenos VI 796 wanted nothing to do with it. In order to spoil somebody’s enjoyment of wine, Plin. n. h. XXXII 138 recommends a drink of wine in which somebody has killed two eels. <60> Muddy water, in which eels hang around, was taken as healthy (Plin. h. n. XXXI 36). In order to make water drinkable and to destroy the leeches in it, people would put an eel in it (Geopon. II 5, 15). According to Verrius Flaccus (in Plin. h. n. IX 77), the Romans beat boys with thick eel skins, cf. Isidor orig. V 27 and Hesych. s. σκυτάλαι. For the Egyptians, the eel was holy (Herod. II 72), <page break 3/4> which the comics in Athenaios VII 299c make fun of. But even in the Greek world, there were holy eels. The most famous were those in the Arethusa Spring (Athen. VIII 331e. Aelian n. a. VIII 4 [talking about an eel]. Plutarch de soll. an. 23. Porphyr. de abstin. III 5). Next, there’s the spring in Syracuse named after the island Ortygia, in which there were holy fish (Diod. V 3. Schol. Pind. Nem. 1), Athenaios however explicitly names the Arethusa in Chalkis on Euboia as their home. As well as this, the river Heloros in Sicily contained tame eels (Nymphodoros in Athen. loc. cit. Plin. XXXII 16. Aelian. h. a. XII 30; cf. Apollodoros in Steph. Byz. s. Ἕλωρος) and finally, the spring of the Karian Zeus Λαβρανδεύς (Aelian. Plin. loc. cit.). The holy animals wore golden earrings and necklaces and were fed. We are told that Krisamis of Kos perished along with his race because he killed an eel which had stolen his best sheep, <20> and despite a dream warning him, he left it unburied (Ps. Zenob. IV 64. Hesych. and Suid. s. Κρίσαμις). The smoothness of an eel was proverbial (anguilla est, elabitur [it’s an eel, it slides] Plaut. Pseudol. 747, cf. Lucian Anachars. 1 and Timon 29). The description of the eel in Imhoof-Blumer and O. Keller Tier- und Pflanzenbilder a. Münz. u. Gemmen Taf. VIII 3 (?); XXIII 13.

[Oder.]