加入VIP
  • 专属下载特权
  • 现金文档折扣购买
  • VIP免费专区
  • 千万文档免费下载

上传资料

关闭

关闭

关闭

封号提示

内容

首页 [英]茵维尔德著:动物、神与人:希腊、罗马与早期基督教的思想中对动物看法的演变

[英]茵维尔德著:动物、神与人:希腊、罗马与早期基督教的思想中对动物看法的演变

[英]茵维尔德著:动物、神与人:希腊、罗马与早期基督教的思想中…

Stlnz
2008-08-14 0人阅读 举报 0 0 暂无简介

简介:本文档为《[英]茵维尔德著:动物、神与人:希腊、罗马与早期基督教的思想中对动物看法的演变pdf》,可适用于人文社科领域

IngvildSælidGilhusexploresthetransitionfromtraditionalGreekandRomanreligiontoChristianityintheRomanEmpireandtheeffectofthischangeonhowanimalswereregarded,illustratingthemainfactorsinthecreationofaChristianconceptionofanimalsOneoftheunderlyingassumptionsofthebookisthatchangesinthewayanimalmotifsareusedandthewayhuman–animalrelationsareconceptualizedserveasindicatorsofmoregeneralculturalshiftsGilhusatteststhatinlateantiquity,animalswereusedassymbolsinageneralredefinitionofculturalvaluesandassumptionsAwiderangeofkeytextsareconsulted,rangingfromphilosophicaltreatisestonovelsandpoemsonmetamorphosesfrombiographiesofholymensuchasApolloniusofTyanaandAntony,theChristiandesertascetic,tonaturalhistoryfromtheNewTestamentviaGnostictextstotheChurchfathersfrompaganandChristiancriticismofanimalsacrificetotheactsofthemartyrsBoththepaganandtheChristianconceptionofanimalsremainedrichandmultilayeredthroughthecenturies,andthisbookpresentsthedominantthemesanddevelopmentsintheconceptionofanimalswithoutlosingthatcomplexityIngvildSælidGilhusisprofessoroftheHistoryofReligionsattheUniversityofBergenHerpublicationsincludeLaughingGods,WeepingVirgins(Routledge)ANIMALS,GODSANDHUMANSIngvildSælidGilhusANIMALS,GODSANDHUMANSChangingAttitudestoAnimalsinGreek,RomanandEarlyChristianIdeasFirstpublishedbyRoutledgeParkSquare,MiltonPark,Abingdon,OxonXRNSimultaneouslypublishedintheUSAandCanadabyRoutledgeMadisonAve,NewYork,NYRoutledgeisanimprintoftheTaylorFrancisGroup©IngvildSælidGilhusAllrightsreservedNopartofthisbookmaybereprintedorreproducedorutilisedinanyformorbyanyelectronic,mechanicalorothermeans,nowknownorhereafterinvented,includingphotocopyingandrecording,orinanyinformationstorageorretrievalsystem,withoutpermissioninwritingfromthepublishersBritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationDataAcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibraryLibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationDataAcatalogrecordforthisbookhasbeenrequestedISBN:(hbk)ISBN:(pbk)ISBN:(hbk)ISBN:(pbk)TaylorFrancisGroupistheAcademicDivisionofTFInformaplcThiseditionpublishedintheTaylorFranciseLibrary,“TopurchaseyourowncopyofthisoranyofTaylorFrancisorRoutledge’scollectionofthousandsofeBookspleasegotowwweBookstoretandfcouk”AcknowledgementsviiIntroductionAnimalsintheRomanEmpireUnitedbysoulordividedbyreasonVegetarianism,naturalhistoryandphysiognomicsImaginationandtransformationsThereligiousvalueofanimalsAnimalsacrifice:traditionsandnewinventions“Godisamaneater”:theanimalsacrificeanditscriticsTheNewTestamentandthelambofGodFightingthebeastsInternalanimalsandbestialdemonsThecrucifieddonkeyman,theleontocephalusandthechallengeofbeastsWingedhumans,speakinganimalsvCONTENTSConsequencesNotesBibliographyIndexCONTENTSviThisstudyofanimalsinancientreligionstartedaspartofacrossdisciplinaryresearchproject,“TheconstructionofChristianidentityinantiquity,”fundedbytheNorwegianResearchCouncilBymeansofthisprojectourresearchgroupestablishedChristianantiquityasadistinctandinterdisciplinaryfieldofstudyinNorwayThestimulatingenvironmentcreatedinthisgrouphasbeenagreatinspirationforthisstudyofanimalsIamdeeplyindebtedtothoseinvolved,especiallytoHalvorMoxnesswhowasinstrumentalingettingtheideaofajointprojectonChristianantiquitytomaterializeIwillliketothankallmycolleaguesoftheinterdisciplinarymilieuoftheInstituteofClassicPhilology,RussianandtheHistoryofReligionsattheUniversityofBergenforinspiringseminaries,interestingdiscussionsandconstructivcriticismDuringthelastthreeyearsthestudyofanimalshasbeencontinuedinasmallresearchgroupfocusingonlifeprocessesandbodyinantiquity,fundedbytheNorwegianResearchCouncilIwanttothankDagØisteinEndsjø,HugoLundhaug,TuridKarlsenSeimandGunhildVidénforcriticalreading,fruitfuldiscussionsandinspirationMythanksarealsoduetoSivEllenKraftandRichardHPierceforhelpfulcommentsonpartsofthemanuscriptMyfriendandcolleagueLisbethMikaelssonhasbeenagreatsupportduringalltheupsanddownsoftheprojectTroelsEngbergPedersengenerouslyofferedtoreadthewholemanuscript,IamgratefulforhiscarefulreadingIextendmythankstotheanonymousreviewersofRoutledgewhoprovidedmanyvaluablesuggestionsIfurtherwanttothankthelibrariansattheUniversityLibrary,Bergen,especiallyKariNordmo,whohavealwaysprovidedmewiththebooksIneededIoffermysincerethankstoMariteSapietsforimprovingmyEnglishIwouldliketothankWalterdeGruyterandtheSwedishInstituteinRomeforpermissiontoreprintrevisedversionsofpreviouslypublishedpapersChaptercontainspartofmyarticle“youhavedreamtthatourGodisanass’shead”:AnimalsandChristiansinAntiquity”,publishedinviiACKNOWLEDGEMENTSMichaelStausberg(ed),KontinuitätenundBrücheinderReligionsgeschichte,BerlinNewYork:WalterdeGruyter,,pp–Chaptercontainsrevisedportionsofmyarticle”Theanimalsacrificeanditscritics”,publishedinBarbroSantilloFrizell(ed),PECUSManandAnimalinAntiquity,Rome,pp–Asforinstitutionalsupport,IamgratefultotheUniversityofBergenforexcellentworkingconditionsandtotheNorwegianResearchCouncilforgrantsFinally,withallmyheartIthankmyhusbandNilsErikGilhusforhisunfalteringencouragementandneverfailingsupportIngvildSælidGilhusJulyACKNOWLEDGEMENTSviiiAnimals,godsandhumansAnimalsarebeingswithwhichwemayhavesocialrelationsWefeelsympathyandaffectionforthem,butwealsoexploitthemforourownbenefit,forcompany,sportornourishmentTheyarepersonsandthings,friendsandfoodWecommunicatewithanimals,butwealsokill,cookandeatthemAnimalsaresimilartousaswellasdifferentfromus,whichencouragesustoimagineourselvesasthemtoconceptualizeourownbeingandtousethemassymbolstomakesenseofourworldOurthinkingaboutanimalsisnotsimple,anymorethanourfeelingsforthemarestraightforwardThereisaconflictbetweenourfriendlinessforsomeanimalsandourfearofothers,alsobetweenoureconomicinterestinthemandanaturalempathyforlivingbeingswhenwehavetheimaginationtothinkofourselvesintheirplaceByarousingcontradictorythoughtsandamultitudeofemotions,animalsbecomenaturalsymbolsandsuchstuffasmythsaremadeofTherelationshipbetweenanimalsandhumansisarelationshipbetweenonespeciesandatremendousvarietyofothersEvenifwefeelthatthereisanunbridgeablegapbetweenourspeciesandallothers,thisgapisvieweddifferentlywithregardtodifferentspecies,whichcontributestomakingtherelationshipbetweenhumansandanimalsextremelycomplex(Midgley)Howkinshipandotherness,closenessanddistancebetweenhumansandanimalsareexperiencedandexpressedvariesindifferenttypesofdiscourse,anddifferentculturalinterpretationsmaybemadeofthesameanimalInreligions,animalsappearasthethirdpartyintheinteractionbetweengodsandhumanbeings,oftenasmediatorsInthistrinity,animalsandhumansshareafleshandbloodreality,whilegodsarecreaturesofhumanimaginationandtraditionThisdoesnotnecessarilymeanthatgodsareseenaslessrealthanhumansandanimals–usuallytheyarethoughtofasmorerealRitualsfunctionabovealltoestablishandconfirmtherealityofthegodsKillinganimalsinhonourofthemandofferingthempartofthemeatfromthesacrificewasonewayinwhichtheirrealitywasestablishedINTRODUCTIONHistoricalchangesandoutdatedanswersAtsomepointsinhistory,majorchangesoccurinthereligiousmeaningandfunctionsofanimalsThiswassoinIndianearlythreethousandyearsago,whenthesacrificingofanimalswasreplacedbybloodlessofferings,eatingmeatwasdeemedlesspurethanavegetariandiet,anddoingnoinjurytoanylivingbeingbecameauniversalethicalcommandinBrahmanicallawbooks(Jacobsen)InEngland,attitudestothenaturalworldchangedintheearlymodernperiodAnimalswereviewedwithincreasingsympathy,andevenwritersintheChristiantraditionnolongersawanimalsasmadesolelyforhumansustenance(Thomas:)Inlateantiquity,amajorchangeappeared,whenthemainreligiousinstitution,theanimalsacrifice,wasreplacedbyChristianrituals,whichnolongerincludedanyofferingofanimalfleshAtthesametime,ChristianscontinuedtoemployasacrificialterminologyTheyregardedthedeathofChristasfulfillingthesacrificialritesoftheOldTestamentandusedthesacrificiallambasasymbolforChrist(Snyder:–)WithChristianity,thehumanbodybecamethekeysymbolinareligionthatfocusedonthedeathandresurrectionofChrist,andtheultimatehopeofbelieverswastheirownbodilyresurrectionThischangefromasacrificialcult,wheretheanimalbodyhadbeenakeysymbol,totheChristiancult,wherethehumanbodybecamethenewkeysymbol,isoneofthedramaticchangesinthehistoryofreligionsWhatthischangeimpliedforthewayhumanbeings,throughsymbols,mythsandrituals,imaginedtheirrelationshipwiththerestofthelivingworldhasbeenremarkablylittleinvestigatedFewhavefounditstrangethatthebloodlesscultsofChristianityreplacedthesacrificialcultsoftheRomanEmpireThereasonwhytheworshipofgodsbymeansofanimalsacrificesgavewaytothecultofChristhasnotbeendiscussedverymuchThiscuriouslackofresearchmaybeduetoacombinationofassumptionsbasedonevolutionismandimplicitChristianbeliefsThatthereligioussignificanceofanimalswasdiscussedforsolonginthecontextofculturalevolutionismhasassociatedtheproblemwithanoutdatedwayofthinkingThereligioussignificanceofanimalsisstillmainlyassociatedwithearlierstagesofculturaldevelopment,eveniftheevolutionisticparadigmonwhichtheseideaswereoriginallybasedhasbeenrejectedTherefore,onereasonwhyfewhaveseriouslyaskedwhythebloodlesscultsofChristianityreplacedthesacrificialcultsoftheRomanEmpireissimplythatthisproblemwasregardedassolvedThesolutionwasenlightenmentandcivilizationTheslaughterofsacrificialvictimsismoreprimitivethanbloodlesscults,theworshipofgodsinanimalformisalessadvancedtypeofreligionthantheworshipofgodsinhumanforms,andpolytheismismoreprimitivethanmonotheismSeenfromthisperspective,INTRODUCTIONChristianitystandsforculturalprogressInthecaseofanimalsacrifice,furthermore,therehasbeenatendencytogiveuniversalanswerstophenomenathatinrealityareextremelyvariedandperhapshaveonlyasuperficialresemblance(Bloch)Inthepresentstudy,wearedealingwithalimitedperiodinhumanhistory,thefirsttothefourthcenturyCE,andalimitedgeographicalarea,theMediterraneanAnimalsacrificedidnotoriginateinthisperiodonthecontrary,itwasbroughttoanend–atleastinitstraditionalformAfterithadbeenbanned,peoplemanagedverywellwithoutkillingtheiranimalsinasacrificialandreligioussettingTheendofsacrificedidnotmeanthatpeoplestoppedkillinganimalsorthattheydeclinedtoeatmeat,onlythattheynolongerdidthesethingsinreligioussettingsOnedifferencebetweentheearlierandlaterperiodswasthatthebutcheringofanimals,whichhadbeenareligiousactivity,wasnowsecularizedHowever,theendofanimalsacrificedidnotmeantheendofsacrificialideology,whichwascontinuedinChristianityThetransitionfrompaganismtoChristianityoffersusanopportunitytolookatthemuchdebatedquestionoftheoriginofsacrificeinadifferentwayandaskotherquestionsinsteadWewillnotaskwhypeoplestartedtosacrificeanimals(aboutwhich,whenallissaidanddone,wecanknowverylittle)butratherwhytheystoppeddoingsoWhydidthebloodlessChristiancultsreplaceanimalsacrificeWearebetterequippedtosuggestreasonswhysacrificecametoanendinlateantiquitythantogiveareasonforitsorigininprehistoryIfitisstrangethatthesacrificialcultcametoanend,itislikewisestrangethatthechangefromasacrificialnonChristianculttoaChristiancultwasnotaccompaniedbyessentialchangesindiet,forinstancebyaturntovegetarianismsimilartotheonewewitnessinIndiainthelastmillenniumBCE–evenmorestrangesincethequestionofpurityoffoodwasanissueamongthedifferentreligiousfactionsandsectsintheempireRepresentativesofvariousreligiouselites,forinstancetheStoicSeneca(–CE),theNeopythagoreanApolloniusofTyana(c–CE)andtheNeoplatonistPorphyry(–CE),abstainedfromeatingfleshWhywasthesacrificeofanimalsdiscontinuedapparentlywithnootherdietaryconsequencesformainstreamChristianitythanthatmeatwasdesacralizedSacrificeisonlyoneelementinGraecoRomanhuman–animalrelationsAsanimalsacrificelostitssignificance,thereligiousandmoralvalueofanimalswasreducedingeneralTheloweringofthestatusofanimalsisreflectedinphilosophicaldebatesbetweenAristotelians,Epicureans,Platonists,NeopythagoreansandStoicsinwhichtheStoicpositiongraduallybecamedominantAccordingtotheStoics,logosisthecategoricalboundarymarkerbetweenhumansandanimals,animalsarealoga–creatureswithoutreasonThedegradationofanimalsisalsotobeseenwhenanimalworshipwasusedasanexampleofbarbarismandregardedasaprimitiveINTRODUCTIONformofreligionThegrowingimportanceofthearenawithitsmassacresofanimalscouldalsoreflectadevaluationofanimalsTwocomplementaryreligiousprocessesthatconcernedtherelationshipbetweenanimalsandhumanswereatworkintheGraecoRomanworldOnewasasacralizationofthehumanform,seeninseveralofthenewcults,amongthemChristianityTheotherwasadesacralizationofanimals,aprocessthatcanbeobservedwhenthetraditionalsacrificialcultcametoanendThedesacralizationofanimalsisalsotobeseeninthecriticismofpeoplewhoweresuspectedofanimalworshipItisasifanimalsandhumanshadbeenplacedontwoscales,andthescaleshadstartedtomoveapartThehumansweregivengreaterreligiousvalue,theanimalslessButeveniftheprocessofsacralizationofhumansanddesacralizationofanimalswasnotChristianinorigin,ChristianitydevelopedtheseprocessesfurtherTheyweregivenafinalformandincorporatedintothecontinuousculturalworkofbuildinganewChristianidentityThestudyofanimalsThepresentstudyowesmuchtoseveralbranchesofculturalresearchOneincludestheclassicstudiesofanimalsinreligionsIntheheydayofevolutionism,totemismandthereligionofhuntersandgathererswerethemaincontextsforthediscussionofthereligiousfunctionofanimals(Willis:–)Thisdiscussionfocusedontotemismasasocialsystem,butitsometimesalsostressedthenutritionalvalueoftheanimalsinvolvedinthissystemHowever,thedebateabouttotemismtookanewcoursein,whenClaudeLéviStrausssaidthatnaturalspeciesarechosen,notbecausetheyare“goodtoeat”butbecausetheyare“goodtothink”(LéviStrauss:–)Fromthatpointon,totemismhasmainlybeenregardedasasystemofsymbolswhereanimalsappearas“chiffres”andasillustrationsofhumanthoughtprocessesHowever,itmustbepointedoutthatthestructuralistturninitiatedbyLéviStrauss,althoughitofferedafruitfulnewperspective,alsoimpliedareductioninthebroadersignificanceofanimalsOnepointwasthateconomicfactorsintherelationsbetweenanimalsandhumansweredownplayedanotherwasthatemotionalfactorswereoverlookedAnimalsarenotonlygoodtothink,theyarealsogoodto“feel”,andtheygiveemotionalvalueandimpetustoanythingtheyarelinkedwithThatatleastisoneofthereasonswhytheyaresoeffectivelyusedassymbolsandmetaphorsLiketotemism,sacrificehasbeentreatedinrecentresearchasasystemofsignsandasaninstitutionthatlinksanddivideselementsinthesocialfabric(DetienneandVernant)Animalsacrificehasfurtherbeenlinkedwitheconomicfactorsand,aboveall,thedistributionofpower(GordonJayStowers)ResearchonanimalsinantiquityisthesecondbranchofresearchthathasbeenofvaluetothisstudyThisisawidefieldthatincludesancientdebatesINTRODUCTIONonthestatusofanimalsaswellasveterinarymedicinestudiesofanimalsinartaswellastheanalysisofancientphysiognomicsandstudiesofanimalsintheRomanarenaaswellasecologicaltreatisesThreebookshavebeenaspecialinspirationtothepresentstudyTheseareJMCToynbee’ssurveyoftheRomanuseofanimals,AnimalsinRomanLifeandArtUrsDierauer,TierundMenschimDenkenderAntikeStudienzurTierpsychologie,AnthropologieundEthikandRichardSorabji,AnimalMindsandHumanMorals:TheOriginsoftheWesternDebateToynbee’sbooktakesitspointofdeparturefromthestudyofRomanart,whilethebooksbyDierauerandSorabjiarebasedonclosereadingsofGreekandLatintextsandinvestigationsoftheancientdebateonthestatusandvalueofanimalsTheflourishingfieldofresearchonreligionChristianityinlateantiquityhasbeenvitalforthepresentstudyThisresearchischaracterizedbyawillingnesstoseeChristianityandpaganismsynoptically,whichimpliestakingChristianityoutofChurchhistoryandintothewiderancientworldofwhichitwaspartItalsoimplieslookingatthedifferentbranchesofChristianitywithoutautomaticallyapplyinganorthodoxyheterodoxyperspectiveSomeofthesemorerecentstudiesarecharacterizedbyacertainsubversiveperspective:thetextsarenotonlytobereadwiththeelitethatproducedthembutalsoagainstit(Burrus)AntiquityandlatemodernityhaveincommonanincreasedinterestinthestatusandvalueofanimalsContemporarystudiesoftheculturalandmoralvalueofanimalsisthefourthbranchofresearchfromwhichthisstudyhasprofitedThemoderndebatehasfocusedonethicalissuessurroundingthetreatmentofanimalsbyhumansPeterSingerarguesforaradicalchangeinthetreatmentofanimalsandbaseshisargumentsontheprincipleofequalityandtheideathatweshouldminimizesufferingSingercompares“speciesism”toracismandequateshumanandanimalsuffering(Singer,cfalsoRegan)Amoremoderatestandon“speciesism”istakenbyMaryMidgleyinherBeastandMan:TheRootsofHumanNature(),whereshepersuasivelyattemptstosethumanswithintheiranimalcontextTheseau

用户评价(2)

  • 112.112.59.234 谢谢

    2009-11-18 05:13:01

  • gtiee 这个研究有点意思,下载看看,感谢

    2009-11-06 03:29:30

关闭

新课改视野下建构高中语文教学实验成果报告(32KB)

抱歉,积分不足下载失败,请稍后再试!

提示

试读已结束,如需要继续阅读或者下载,敬请购买!

文档小程序码

使用微信“扫一扫”扫码寻找文档

1

打开微信

2

扫描小程序码

3

发布寻找信息

4

等待寻找结果

我知道了
评分:

/49

[英]茵维尔德著:动物、神与人:希腊、罗马与早期基督教的思想中对动物看法的演变

仅供在线阅读

VIP

在线
客服

免费
邮箱

爱问共享资料服务号

扫描关注领取更多福利