Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T07:19:14.949Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - The Place of Nonhuman Primates in Ancient Roman Culture

Narratives and Practices

from Part II - Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2022

Bernardo Urbani
Affiliation:
Venezuelan Institute for Scientific Research
Dionisios Youlatos
Affiliation:
Aristotle University, Thessaloniki
Andrzej T. Antczak
Affiliation:
Universiteit Leiden
Get access

Summary

One’s apprehension of the natural world, of ecosystems, and the species living therein, almost always takes shape in the contexts of (1) interspecific relational practices, (2) modalities and forms of naturalistic knowledge, and (3) institutionalized practices of encounter with nonhuman animals. The elaboration of particular cultural representations of nonhuman primates is no exception: it too largely depends on cultural variables. Scientific thought as disseminated for popular consumption, blockbuster films, and bourgeois entertainments, such as zoos and circuses, have contributed substantially to modern humans’ conceptions of primates, especially anthropomorphic apes. The ancient Roman world between the end of the first millennium BCE and the beginning of first millennium CE, however, was characterized by relational practices, cultural categories, and forms of scientific knowledge of nonhuman primates very different from those now operating in the Western imaginary. It is significant, for example, that the Romans most commonly interacted not with gorillas and chimpanzees, but with macaques and baboons. By investigating how nonhuman primates were integrated into Roman cultural encyclopedia, this article will center not on ape lore per se but instead upon the distinct cultural matrix within which primates were perceived, their behavior interpreted, and their relationship to humans understood.

Keywords:

Ancient Rome, Imitation, Animal–human relation, Nonhuman primates, Ancient zoological knowledge

Type
Chapter
Information
World Archaeoprimatology
Interconnections of Humans and Nonhuman Primates in the Past
, pp. 201 - 224
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Apps, A. (2014). Source citation and authority in Solinus. In Brodersen, K., ed., Solinus. New Studies. Heidelberg: Antike Verlag, 3242.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. F., Henneberg, M., Colson, I. B., et al. (1999). Monkey business in Pompeii. Unique find of a juvenile Barbary macaque skeleton in Pompeii identified using osteology and ancient DNA techniques. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 16, 14101414Google Scholar
Barbara, S. (2012). Armées en marche et découvertes herpétologiques dans l’Antiquité. Anthropozoologica, 47(1), 1549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belanger, C. (2014). Solinus’ Macrobians: A Roman literary account of the Axumite Empire. In Brodersen, K., ed., Solinus. New Studies. Heidelberg: Antike Verlag, 96118.Google Scholar
Bettini, M. (1992). Il ritratto dell’amante. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Bettini, M. (2000). Le orecchie di Hermes. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Bodson, L. (1998). Ancient Greek views on the exotic animal. Arctos, 32, 6185.Google Scholar
Bodson, L. (2000). Motivations for pet-keeping in ancient Greece and Rome: A preliminary survey. In Podberscek, A. L., Paul, E. S., & Serpell, J. A., eds., Companion Animals and Us: Exploring the Relationship between People and Pets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2741.Google Scholar
Brodersen, K. (ed.) (2014) Solinus. New Studies. Heidelberg: Antike Verlag.Google Scholar
Bull, C. H. (2017). Monkey business. Magic vowels and cosmic levels in the Discourse on the Eight and Ninth (NHC VI, 6). Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni, 83, 7594.Google Scholar
Cleary, V. J. (1972). Se sectari simiam: Monkey Business in the Miles Gloriosus. The Classical Journal, 67 (4), 209305.Google Scholar
Connors, C. (2004). Monkey business: Imitation, authenticity, and identity from Pithekoussai to Plautus. Classical Antiquity, 23 (2), 179207.Google Scholar
Deonna, W. (1965). Le symbolisme de l’œil. Paris: de Boccard.Google Scholar
Franco, C. (2014). Shameless. The Canine and the Feminine in Ancient Greece. Oakland: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Franco, C. (2017). Greek and Latin words for human–animal bonds: Metaphors and taboos. In Foegen, T., & Thomas, E., eds., Interactions between Animals and Humans in Graeco-Roman Antiquity. Berlin-Boston: De Gruyter, 3960.Google Scholar
Fuentes, A. (2007). Monkey and human interconnections: The wild, the captive, and the in-between. In Cassidy, R., & Mullin, M., eds., Where the Wild Things Are Now: Domestication Reconsidered. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
Gerber, F., & Baudry-Dautry, A. (2012). La mode de l’animal exotique dans la haute société gallo-romaine. Sépolture d’un singe dans la nécropole de la rue des Caillons à Poitiers. Archéopages, 35, 4247.Google Scholar
Gras, M. (1994). Pithécusses : de l’étymologie à l’histoire. Annali di Archeologia e Storia Antica, n.s. 1, 127131.Google Scholar
Greenlaw, C. (2011). The Represenation of Monkeys in the Art and Thought of Mediterranean Cultures. A New Perspective on Ancient Primates. Oxford: BAR Publishing.Google Scholar
Hornig, K. (2000). Großtiertransporte nach und innerhalb Europas in der Antike – methodische Probleme, Fallbeispiele und kulturelle Rezeption. In von Schmettow, H., ed., Schutz des Kulturerbes unter Wasser: Veränderungen europäischer Lebenskultur durch Fluß- und Seehandel: Beiträge zum Internationalen Kongreß für Unterwasserarchäologie (IKUWA ‘99), 18.-21. Lübstorf: Archäologisches Landesmuseum Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, 177185Google Scholar
Jennison, G. (1937). Animals for Show and Pleasure in Ancient Rome. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Keller, O. (1909). Die Antike Tierwelt. Vol. I. Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
King, A. (2002). Mammals. Evidence from wall paintings, sculpture, mosaics, faunal remains, and ancient literary sources. In Feemster, J. W., & Meyer, F. G., eds., The Natural History of Pompeii. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 401450.Google Scholar
Leblan, V. (2017). Aux frontières du singe. Relations entre hommes et chimpanzés au Kakandé, Guinée (XIXe-XXIe siècle). Paris: Éditions EHESS.Google Scholar
Lissarrague, F. (2013). La cité des satyres. Une anthropologie ludique. Paris: Éditions EHESS.Google Scholar
Louchart, F. (2017). Que faire de l’orang-outan ? Reconstruire la nature à Nyaru Menteng (Indonésie). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Masseti, M., & Bruner, E. (2009). The primates of the western Palaearctic: A biogeographical, historical, and archaeozoological review. Journal of Anthropological Science, 87, 3391.Google Scholar
Maurach, G. (1988). Der Poenulus des Plautus. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Verlag.Google Scholar
McDermott, W. C. (1938). The Ape in Antiquity. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Meyboom, P. G. P. (1995). The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina. Early Evidence of Egyptian Religion in Italy. Leiden, Brill.Google Scholar
Monbrun, Ph. (2015). Quand on rêve d’animaux: place de l’animal et bestiaire du rêve dans les Oneirokritika d’Artémidore. In Weber, G., ed., Artemidor von Daldis und die Antike Traumdeutung. Texte, Kontexte, Lektüren. Berlin-Boston: De Gruyter, 127160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monneret de Villard, U. (1932). Note Nubiane. Aegyptus, 12 (4), 305316.Google Scholar
Naas, V. (2002). Le projet encyclopédique de Pline l’Ancien. Roma: École française de Rome.Google Scholar
Olesti, O., Guàrdia, J., Maragall, M., et al. (2013). Controlling the Pyrenees: A macaque’s burial from Late Antique Iulia Libica (Llívia, La Cerdanya, Spain). In Sarantis, A. & Christie, N., eds., War and Warfare in Late Antiquity. Leiden: Brill, 703731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onida, P. P. (2012). Studi sulla condizione degli animali non umani nel sistema giuridico romano. 2nd ed. Torino: G. Giappichelli.Google Scholar
Oniga, R. (2014). Latin. A Linguistic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Poccetti, P. (1995). Sui nomi antichi dell’isola di Ischia: una traccia di remoti contatti tra vicino Oriente e Italia, Incontri linguistici, 18, 79103.Google Scholar
Polara, G., & De Vivo, A. (2011). Aenaria – Pithecusa – Inarime. Bollettino di Studi Latini, 41 (2), 495521.Google Scholar
Quack, J. F. (2003). Zum ägyptischen Ritual im Iseum Campense in Rom. In Metzner-Nebelsick, C., ed., Rituale in der Vorgeschichte, Antike und Gegenwart: Studien zur Vorderasiatischen, Prähistorischen und Klassischen Archäologie, Ägyptologie, Alten Geschichte, Theologie und Religionswissenschaft. Rahden: Leidorf, 5766.Google Scholar
Richardson, L. (1955). Pompeii: The Casa dei Dioscuri and its Painters. Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome vol. XXIII. Rome: American Academy in Rome.Google Scholar
Salanitro, M. (1992). Il bardocucullo e i cuculli liburnici. Mart. XIV 128 e 140 (139). Atene e Roma, 37 (1), 1015.Google Scholar
Scheid, J. (2004). Quand fut construit l’Iseum Campense? In Ruscu, L. C., ed., Orbis antiquus: studia in honorem Ioannis Pisonis. Cluj-Napoca: Nereamia Napocae, 308311.Google Scholar
Schneider, P. (2004). L’Éthiopie et l’Inde. Interférences et confusions aux extrémités du monde antique (VIIIe siècle avant J.-C. – VIe siècle après J.-C.). Rome: École française de Rome.Google Scholar
Traina, A. (1984). Belva e bestia come metafora di ‘uomo’. Rivista di Filologia e Istruzione Classica, 112, 115119.Google Scholar
Trinquier, J. (2007). L’Éthiopie vue de Grèce et de Rome aux époques hellénistique et romaine. In Pharaons noirs. Sur la Piste des Quarante Jours. Mariemont: Musée Royal de Mariemont, 217244.Google Scholar
Tutrone, F. (2019). Barking at the threshold. Cicero, Lucretius, and the ambiguous status of dogs in Roman culture. In Schmidt, T., & Pahlitzsch, J., eds., Impious Dogs, Haughty Foxes and Exquisite Fish. Berlin-Boston: de Gruyter, 73102.Google Scholar
Vespa, M. (2017). Why avoid a monkey: The refusal of interaction in Galen’s epideixis. In Fögen, T., & Thomas, E., eds., Interactions between Animals and Humans in Graeco-Roman Antiquity. Berlin: de Gruyter, 409434.Google Scholar
Vespa, M. (2021). Geloion mimēma. Studi sulla rappresentazione culturale della scimmia nei testi greci e greco-romani. Turnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
Vespa, M., & Zucker, A. (2020). Imiter ou communiquer : l’intention du singe dans la littérature gréco-romaine. Mètis. Anthropologie des mondes grecs anciens, 18, 233250.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×