{"id":574,"date":"2019-10-01T11:10:23","date_gmt":"2019-10-01T09:10:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/?p=574"},"modified":"2019-10-01T11:10:38","modified_gmt":"2019-10-01T09:10:38","slug":"574","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/2019\/10\/01\/574\/","title":{"rendered":"International Conference | Diffusion of zoological knowledge in late Antiquity and The  Byzantine period"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"#francais\">Pour la Version fran\u00e7aise, cliquez ici <\/a>\u00a0 | \u00a0<a href=\"#allemand\">F\u00fcr die deutsche Version klicken Sie hier<\/a><\/p>\n<h3>Program<\/h3>\n<p><strong>Friday, October 18<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>9:15<\/strong> \u00a0 <em>Welcome &amp; Introduction (O. Hellmann &amp; A. Zucker)<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Session I. Animals and Literary Culture (Chair : S. Lazaris)<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>9:30<\/strong> \u00a0 Steven D. Smith (Hempstead, New York). <em>Theophylact<\/em><em> Simocatta<\/em>: <em>Zoological Lore and Sophistic Culture at the End of Antiquity<\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>10:15<\/strong> \u00a0 Caroline Belanger (T\u00fcbingen \/ St. Andrews). <em>Marvellous, Exotic, and Strange: Zoological Knowledge in Solinus\u2019 <u>Collectanea rerum memorabilium<\/u><\/em><\/li>\n<li>11.00-11:20 Coffee break<\/li>\n<li><strong>11:20<\/strong> Taxiarchis Kolias\u00a0 (Athens). <em>Animals in the Late Byzantine Vernacular Literature<\/em><\/li>\n<li>12:20 Lunch<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Session II. Allegories, Morals, and Politics (Chair : C. Franco)<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>14:<\/strong><strong>00<\/strong> \u00a0 \u00c1lvaro Pires (Providence). <em>A Fiction of Nature and the Nature of Fiction: Allegory in the \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <u>Physiologos<\/u><\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>14:45<\/strong> \u00a0 Diego De Brasi (Marburg). <em>We are\u00a0being taught the nature of our belongings\u201d (Bas.\u00a0Hex. 9.6) \u2013 Basil\u2019s of\u00a0Caesarea\u00a0Homilies on the Six\u00a0Days of Creation: \u2018Knowledge Transfer\u2019\u00a0and Moral\u00a0Education between Aristotle and\u00a0the Bible<\/em><\/li>\n<li>15:30-15:50 Coffee break<\/li>\n<li><strong>15:50<\/strong> \u00a0 Martin Devecka (Santa Cruz). <em>The Goth Menagerie: Epistolary Animals in Cassiodorus\u2019\u00a0<u>Variae<\/u><\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>16:35<\/strong> Daniil Pleshak (St. Petersburg). <em>Animals<\/em>, <em>Theology and Political Propaganda in George of Pisida\u2019s <u>Hexameron<\/u><\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Saturday, October 19<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Session III. Depicting and experiencing animals<\/strong><strong>\u00a0(<\/strong><strong>Chair : S.D. Smith)<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>9:30\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Morgane Cariou (Paris). <em>La r\u00e9ception du savoir ichtyologique des Halieutiques d\u2019Oppien \u00e0 Byzance<\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>10:15<\/strong> Pieter Beullens (Leuven).<em> Bartholomew of Messina and the transmission of greek hippiatry<\/em><\/li>\n<li>11:00-11:20 Coffee break<\/li>\n<li><strong>11:20<\/strong> Cristiana Franco (Siena). <em>Quorum postremo naturae est extra homines esse non posse<\/em>. <em>Appraisals of Canine Ethology in Christian Writers<\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>12.05\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Glenn A. Peers (Syracuse). <em>The Animal Media of Making Christians in the Byzantine World<\/em><\/li>\n<li>13:05 Lunch<\/li>\n<li><strong>14:30\u00a0<\/strong>Thierry Buquet (Caen). <em>Des girafes \u00e0 Byzance<\/em><\/li>\n<li>15h15-15h35 Coffee break<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Session IV. Arabic Traditions (Chair : A. Zucker)<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>15:35\u00a0<\/strong>Meyssa ben Saad &amp; Kaouthar Lamouchi-Chebbi (Paris). <em>Transmission et r\u00e9ception du corpus zoologique aristot\u00e9licien chez les naturalistes arabes m\u00e9di\u00e9vaux : quelques r\u00e9flexions<\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>16:20<\/strong> Jean-Claude Ducene (Paris). <em>Les sources antiques et m\u00e9di\u00e9vales du <u>Kit\u0101b <\/u><\/em><em><u>\u1e6d<\/u><\/em><em><u>ab\u0101\u2018\u012b<\/u><\/em><em><br \/>\n<u>al-<\/u><\/em><em><u>\u1e25<\/u><\/em><em><u>ayaw\u0101n<\/u><\/em><em> (<\/em><em>on the Natures of Animals) <\/em><em>d\u2019al-Marwaz\u012b (XIIe si\u00e8cle)<\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>17:05<\/strong> Remke Kruk (Leiden). <em>Marwaz\u012b&rsquo;s <u>Book on the Natures of Animals<\/u> as a Case History for the Changing Context of Aristotelian Zoological Knowledge in the Arabic Tradition.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>Context<\/h3>\n<p>In the course of the 4th century BC Aristotle and his colleagues in the Peripatetic School established a canonic pool of zoological knowledge. In the following centuries this pool of knowledge was enlarged only in part, but it was absorbed and re-presented in different forms and media. Zoological texts from the Hellenistic Era and the Imperial Period reorganize zoological data in new types of texts (Aristophanes of Byzantium: Epitome; Pliny: Encyclopedia) or use ethological descriptions in ethic discourse by contrasting animal and human (Philo, Plutarch, Aelianus). This process of transmission and transformation of zoological data continues in Late Antiquity (and in the Byzantine Period), though socio-cultural conditions were changing. In the scholarly debate until today the literary products of these periods have not found the same interest as the texts of earlier times.<\/p>\n<h3>Focus<\/h3>\n<p>The 2019 conference in Trier will focus on this process of diffusion and transformation of zoological data in Late Antiquity and the Byzantine Period by selected case studies. We welcome studies on single authors or texts in Greek, Latin and Arabic, studies on visual images and monuments, or \u2013 in a wider perspective \u2013 on literary genres, different media in the visual arts or specific cultural contexts in view of their influence on literature and art.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Program committee<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Annetta Alexandridis, Isabelle Draelants, Cristiana Franco, Brigitte Gauvin, Oliver Hellmann, Stavros Lazaris, Baudouin Van Den Abeele, Georg W\u00f6hrle, Arnaud Zucker<\/p>\n<h3>ABSTRACTS<\/h3>\n<p><strong>Caroline Belanger (T\u00fcbingen \/ St. Andrews). <em>Marvellous, Exotic, and Strange: Zoological Knowledge in Solinus\u2019 <u>Collectanea rerum memorabilium<\/u><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>Solinus\u2019 <em>Collectanea rerum memorabilium <\/em>is one of the only encyclopedic works of natural history surviving from the third\/fourth century. It is also, essentially, a paradoxographical collection of mirabilia. Zoological knowledges plays a central role, as Solinus describes the exotic wildlife of locales all around the world. This paper explores the nature of Solinus\u2019 zoological knowledge, identifying its characteristics and its role in his encyclopedic description of the world, then analysing how it is distinct from the zoological knowledge of his main source, Pliny\u2019s <em>Historia naturalis<\/em>. Finally, the paper discusses what the <em>Collectanea <\/em>reveals of the trends and priorities of zoological learning in Late Antiquity. It contextualises the <em>Collectanea <\/em>within the contemporary Latin <u>fascination with <em>mirabilia<\/em><\/u> (sanctioned for Christian audiences by major thinkers like Augustine), and underlines the \u201cscientific\u201d merit that they were considered to possess. As a compilatory text, the <em>Collectanea <\/em>demonstrates the evolution of Latin zoological knowledge between the first and fourth centuries. As an authoritative text throughout Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, it also indicates how zoological knowledge continued to be received in intellectual circles. The <em>Collectanea<\/em>\u2019s totalising account of marvellous natural history was received across the empire and through the centuries, reinforcing the ongoing dominance of the kind of zoological understanding that Lucian parodies in his short story <em>Amber, or The Swans<\/em>. The analysis will thus centre on the nature of Solinus\u2019 text, but broaden to examine the implications of this authorative work for the condition of zoological learning in Latin Late Antiquity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Pieter Beullens,<em> Bartholomew of Messina and the transmission of greek hippiatry<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Greek hippiatric knowledge came down to us from Antiquity in various forms and recensions. The relations between the extant Greek manuscripts and the excerpted texts that they contain have not yet been completely clarified. Important evidence for the transmission history of the original Greek texts may be gained from the Latin version by Bartholomew of Messina. In recent times, the style and methodology of this 13th-century Sicilian translator were thoroughly studied on the basis of his renderings of ancient philosophical and medical works. The aim of this presentation is to use these newly gained insights regarding the characteristic features of Bartholomew\u2019s style with the Latin version of Hierocles\u2019 hippiatry ascribed to him in the manuscripts, as well as with its epitomized form, and to ascertain his role in the transmission process. The resulting evaluation will define the future approach of the Latin tradition in relation to its source texts and clarify some aspects of the way in which Greek hippiatry was received in the western world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Meyssa ben Saad &amp; Kaouthar Lamouchi-Chebbi (Paris). <em>Transmission et r\u00e9ception du corpus zoologique aristot\u00e9licien chez les naturalistes arabes m\u00e9di\u00e9vaux : quelques r\u00e9flexions<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>La zoologie arabe m\u00e9di\u00e9vale a \u00e9t\u00e9 consid\u00e9r\u00e9e pendant longtemps comme inexistante. Or, dans de nombreuses classifications des sciences \u00e9tablies par des savants arabes m\u00e9di\u00e9vaux (par ex. al-Far\u0101b\u012b dans <em>i\u1e25\u1e63\u0101\u2019 al-\u2018ul\u016bm<\/em>), la zoologie (<em>\u2018ilm al-\u1e25ayaw\u0101n<\/em>) semble appara\u00eetre comme une science autonome au sein des sciences naturelles (<em>\u2018ul\u016bm \u1e6dabi\u2019\u012bya<\/em>). De nombreux types d\u2019ouvrages ont \u00e9t\u00e9 consacr\u00e9s \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9tude des animaux (trait\u00e9s lexicographiques, ouvrages m\u00e9dicaux, ouvrages de g\u00e9ographie \u00e0 dimension \u2018encyclop\u00e9dique\u2019, etc.), mais il existe \u00e9galement un certain nombre d\u2019ouvrages consacr\u00e9s aux animaux avec une d\u00e9marche \u00ab\u00a0scientifique\u00a0\u00bb, dont l\u2019objectif est de comprendre et d\u2019analyser des ph\u00e9nom\u00e8nes biologiques relatifs au monde vivant. Des recherches r\u00e9centes ont fait \u00e9merger le savant al-\u011e\u0101\u1e25i\u1e93 (776-868) et son ouvrage naturaliste <em>Kit\u0101b al-\u1e24ayaw\u0101n<\/em> comme une r\u00e9f\u00e9rence majeure de l\u2019histoire de la zoologie arabe, \u00e0 travers une m\u00e9thodologie accordant une place importante \u00e0 l\u2019observation, l\u2019exp\u00e9rience et la lecture critique des sources. Une de ces sources majeures est le corpus zoologique aristot\u00e9licien, dont <em>l\u2019Histoire des Animaux<\/em>, <em>Parties des Animaux<\/em> et <em>G\u00e9n\u00e9ration des animaux<\/em> ont \u00e9t\u00e9 traduits en arabe vers 815 et rassembl\u00e9s dans un corpus appel\u00e9 <em>Kit\u0101b al-\u1e24ayaw\u0101n <\/em>[<em>Livre des Animaux<\/em>] par Yahya Ibn al-Bitriq, paternit\u00e9 sur laquelle subsistent encore de nombreux doutes (Brugmann-Lulofs, 1971, Kruk, 1979, Endress, 1997). Quelle a \u00e9t\u00e9 la r\u00e9ception des connaissances issues de ce corpus aristot\u00e9licien, comment ont-elles \u00e9t\u00e9 assimil\u00e9es, discut\u00e9es, comment se sont-elles int\u00e9gr\u00e9es aux connaissances zoologiques locales\u00a0? Enfin, quelle lecture critique les savants arabes ont fait de ce corpus, quelle part d\u2019originalit\u00e9, d\u2019innovation\u00a0?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Thierry Buquet (Caen). <em>Giraffes in Byzantium<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In the Latin West, the giraffe remains poorly known during medieval times. Reported by the Latin Bible, the camelopardalis is described very imperfectly by Pliny, who forgets to mention its size and the characteristic length of its neck. When giraffes are sent to Italy in the 13th century, no one seems to be able to identify the animal named giraffa (after the Arabic zar\u00e2fa) to the \u00ab\u00a0camelopard\u00a0\u00bb described by Pliny. The situation is very different in Byzantium, where the giraffe is still named after its Greek zoonym kamelopardalis, especially when chroniclers refer to the arrival of this animal in Constantinople, whether it was during late antiquity and in the 11th and 13th centuries, when this animal was offered to various emperors as a diplomatic gift. This \u00ab\u00a0recognition\u00a0\u00bb of the ancient animal is observed in medieval scholia on ancient authors who described the giraffe, such as the 13th century one on Agatharchides of Cnidus. In the epitome of Timothy of Gaza&rsquo;s Book of animals, a medieval commentary adds that the giraffe had been seen during the reign of Constantine Monomachus.\u00a0 The transmission of the ancient works that mentioned the giraffe (in addition to the previous ones, Oppian of Apamea is to be noted) has allowed the Byzantine world to have good descriptions of this rare animal, some of which will be compiled, for example, in the Sylloge Constantini. The objective of this paper will be to study the ancient descriptions of the giraffe transmitted during the Byzantine period, while medieval testimonies shed new light on the use of the exotic animal in diplomacy and the representation of imperial power.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Morgane Cariou (Paris). <em>La r\u00e9ception du savoir ichtyologique des Halieutiques d\u2019Oppien \u00e0 Byzance<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>Les <em>Halieutiques<\/em>, po\u00e8me biologique et technique r\u00e9dig\u00e9 entre 175 et 180 de notre \u00e8re, constituent un t\u00e9moignage unique en son genre sur le savoir ichtyologique antique\u00a0: ils rassemblent et organisent les descriptions \u00e9thologiques ou morphologiques de 161 esp\u00e8ces \u2013 poissons, crustac\u00e9s, mollusques ou c\u00e9tac\u00e9s \u2013 tant\u00f4t connues d\u2019Aristote, tant\u00f4t \u2013 pour le quart d\u2019entre elles \u2013 mentionn\u00e9es chez nul autre auteur. Dans le cadre de la conf\u00e9rence de Trier, nous souhaiterions aborder la question de la r\u00e9ception, de la diffusion et de la transformation du savoir ichtyologique de cette \u0153uvre \u00e0 Byzance. Les quelque 60 manuscrits byzantins qui nous sont parvenus, tous charg\u00e9s d\u2019annotations, de scholies, de gloses et de diagrammes, attestent non seulement que le texte a suscit\u00e9 un vif int\u00e9r\u00eat mais encore qu\u2019il a \u00e9t\u00e9 int\u00e9gr\u00e9 dans l\u2019enseignement universitaire. Ce fait soul\u00e8ve plusieurs interrogations\u00a0: comment les ma\u00eetres abordaient-ils le genre particulier que constitue la po\u00e9sie scientifique\u00a0? S\u2019il est vrai que certains \u00e9rudits, tel Eustathe de Thessalonique, s\u2019int\u00e9ressaient plut\u00f4t \u00e0 l\u2019innovation langagi\u00e8re, d\u2019autres, comme Jean Tzetz\u00e8s, se sont davantage attach\u00e9s \u00e0 \u00e9lucider le contenu zoologique du texte. Sur quel type de savoir animal ces derniers concentraient-ils leurs commentaires\u00a0? Comment l\u2019adaptaient-ils \u00e0 leurs propres connaissances\u00a0? Dans quel but, de mani\u00e8re plus g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, les byzantins\u00a0s\u2019int\u00e9ressaient-ils \u00e0 l\u2019ichtyologie antique ? Pour r\u00e9pondre \u00e0 ces questions, il conviendra de se tourner vers l\u2019abondant corpus de scholies aux <em>Halieutiques<\/em>, qui diff\u00e8re fortement d\u2019un manuscrit \u00e0 l\u2019autre et, en tout \u00e9tat de cause, de l\u2019unique \u00e9dition disponible, ainsi que vers des r\u00e9sum\u00e9s et paraphrases in\u00e9dits. L\u2019utilisation de ce mat\u00e9riel nouveau devrait permettre d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse qui convergent vers un int\u00e9r\u00eat particulier pour les variations de l\u2019ichtyonymie et la classification des esp\u00e8ces marines, toutes deux \u00e9tudi\u00e9es, semble-t-il, dans le cadre d\u2019enseignements m\u00e9dicaux. On verra ainsi que de nombreuses scholies s\u2019attachent \u00e0 donner l\u2019\u00e9quivalent byzantin d\u2019un zoonyme antique tout en signalant des variantes locales. Plusieurs lemmes s\u2019int\u00e9ressent \u00e0 des questions de taxinomie et c\u2019est la raison pour laquelle on rencontre, dans la tradition manuscrite, une acolouthie avec des fragments du d\u00e9but de l\u2019<em>\u00c9pitom\u00e9<\/em> d\u2019Aristophane de Byzance, notamment dans les commentaires de Jean Tzetz\u00e8s pr\u00e9serv\u00e9s dans les marges du fameux <em>Ambrosianus <\/em>C 222 inf. On esp\u00e8re ainsi que l\u2019\u00e9tude de ce cas doublement particulier \u2013 par le format litt\u00e9raire et par le choix de la seule ichtyologie \u2013 contribuera \u00e0 nourrir la r\u00e9flexion sur la diffusion du savoir zoologique \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9poque byzantine.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Diego De Brasi (Marburg). <em>We are being taught the nature of our belongings\u201d (Bas. <\/em><em>Hex. 9.6) Basil\u2019s of Caesarea Homilies on the Six Days of Creation: \u2018Knowledge Transfer\u2019 and Moral Education between Aristotle and the Bible<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>Basil the Great, Bishop of Caesarea from 370 CE until his death in 379 CE, focuses in the seventh, eighth and ninth homily of his <em>Hexaemeron<\/em> on the creation of plants and animals as described in the first chapter of the book Genesis. In his explanation of the biblical text, he explicitly rejects the allegorical interpretations of other Christian authors and opts for a literal exegesis. His description of different animals and their characteristics depends mainly on peripatetic findings, which had been abridged by Hellenistic Epitomai, and on other pagan writings from the imperial time (e.g. Oppian\u2019s <em>Halieutik\u00e1<\/em>), whose authors, in turn, had adapted biological evidence gathered by Aristotle and his pupils to their own rhetorical and literary purposes. On the one hand, Basil aims to teach his audience, i.e. a heterogeneous Christian community, how beautiful and teleologically functional the natural world is. On the other hand, he comments on animal behavior from a moral point of view and thus uses animals as examples for the moral education of his congregation. Furthermore, Basil offers a very brief analysis of animal \u2018psychology\u2019. According to him, aquatic and terrestrial animals have distinct forms of souls, as the different wording used in their description in the biblical text shows (Hex. 8.1). After a brief introduction, in which I will examine the Sitz im Leben and the overall structure of the <em>Hexaemeron<\/em>, my paper will focus on two main questions: 1. Which literary techniques does Basil use to incorporate pagan biological knowledge in his exegesis of creation? How does he convey this information to his audience? 2. How do Basil\u2019s remarks about the different types of animal soul at the beginning of the eighth homily help to understand his exegetical and paraenetic intention better?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Martin Devecka (Santa Cruz). <em>The Goth Menagerie: Epistolary Animals in Cassiodorus\u2019 <u>Variae<\/u><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>Much recent scholarship, including my own, has offered allegorical or communicative interpretations of the zoological passages in Cassiodorus\u2019 Variae (e.g. 1.35, 4.34, and 10.30), letters written on behalf of various Italian Ostrogothic rulers from Theoderic to the fall of the Gothic kingdom.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\"><sup>[4]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Adopting the perspective of this conference, I now propose to treat these passages instead as elements in a process of knowledge-diffusion and, to the extent that they bore the king\u2019s signature, of knowledge-making by fiat. Taking advantage of recent interpretive work on Cassiodorus\u2019 zoological digressions, I will trace the sources of their zoological content in order to show that his puzzling and sometimes fantastic descriptions of animals are in fact original syntheses that show a distinctive \u201cleveling\u201d of value between Aristotelian science, more recent compilations, and a Christian zoology then still under formation. I will address the reception of these letters both in the near term, by their addressees, and in the longer term, by an audience that includes some of the leading literary lights of Gothic Italy and the European Middle Ages. My aim is to characterize the Variae as an exercise in state-sanctioned production and dissemination of facts about animals. I will argue that Cassiodorus\u2019 engagement with the Amal dynasty positioned him to impose his idiosyncratic zoology as a new classic, and that it was so received by at least some readers. Here as elsewhere, political power is central to the diffusion of zoological knowledge<\/p>\n<p><strong>Jean-Claude Ducene (Paris). <em>Les sources antiques et m\u00e9di\u00e9vales du <u>Kit\u0101b <\/u><\/em><em><u>\u1e6d<\/u><\/em><em><u>ab\u0101\u2018\u012b<\/u><\/em><em> <u>al-<\/u><\/em><em><u>\u1e25<\/u><\/em><em><u>ayaw\u0101n<\/u><\/em><em> (<\/em><em>on the Natures of Animals) <\/em><em>d\u2019al-Marwaz\u012b (XIIe si\u00e8cle)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Parmi les ouvrages zoologiques m\u00e9di\u00e9vaux arabes, le \u00ab Livre des caract\u00e9res naturels des animaux \u00bb du m\u00e9decin iranien Sharaf al-Zam\u0101n \u1e6c\u0101hir al-Marwaz\u012b (XIIe si\u00e8cle) reste encore relativement peu connu, cela venant du fait qu\u2019il n\u2019\u00e9tait attest\u00e9 jusqu\u2019\u00e0 pr\u00e9sent que par trois manuscrits incomplets et divergents. Or, la d\u00e9couverte d\u2019un quatri\u00e8me manuscrit, conserv\u00e9 \u00e0 T\u00e9h\u00e9ran permet d\u2019en avoir une id\u00e9e plus exhaustive. Al-Marwaz\u012b subdivise la faune en quatre ensembles dans lesquels l\u2019\u00e9num\u00e9ration des animaux ne suit pas un ordre sp\u00e9cifique, mais lui permet n\u00e9anmoins de nommer et de d\u00e9crire plus de cent soixante-dix animaux. Notons qu\u2019il donne parfois, \u00e0 c\u00f4t\u00e9 du nom arabe, les appellations syriaques, persanes et grecques de l\u2019animal. Notre communication vise \u00e0 pr\u00e9senter la partie zoologique de l\u2019ouvrage ainsi reconstitu\u00e9e et d\u2019\u00e9tudier en particulier ses sources antiques. En effet, s\u2019appuyant essentiellement sur des sources livresques et peu de t\u00e9moignages oraux ou d\u2019observations personnelles, al-Marwaz\u012b utilise des sources m\u00e9di\u00e9vales (zoologiques, m\u00e9dicales et g\u00e9ographiques) mais aussi antiques, dont Aristote, Galien, Dioscoride et Timoth\u00e9e de Gaza. Ce dernier nous int\u00e9resse en particulier car, dans la suite de travaux de Remke Kruk, de nouveaux passages de Timoth\u00e9e ont \u00e9t\u00e9 reconnus dans ce texte d\u2019al-Marwaz\u012b, notamment en ayant eu recours aux textes identifi\u00e9s par Sami Aydin dans un bestiaire syriaque anonyme.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Cristiana Franco (Siena). <em>Quorum postremo naturae est extra homines esse non posse<\/em>. <em>Appraisals of Canine Ethology in Christian Writers<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The dog is one of the major figures in ancient pagan discourse about non-human animals\u2019 virtuses and vices. Regarded as a valuable companion in many activities (hunting, guarding, companionship), it was nevertheless often blamed for not being capable of putting up with all human requirements. Praised for its <em>fides<\/em> in many Roman sources, the dog receive a new appraisal in the Christian writers of late antiquity. While reflecting the negative evaluation of the animal in the Jewish culture, they feel compelled not to completely dismiss the Roman appreciation for the animal but shift the focus on virtuses more in tune with the new Christian ethics such as <em>oboedientia<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Taxiarchis Kolias\u00a0 (Athens). <em>Animals in the Late Byzantine Vernacular Literature<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>During the late Byzantine period, are issued and diffused vernacular rhymed texts of anonymous authors, in the invented stories of which animals speak and debate like humans. Their quite rich manuscript tradition, but also their survival up to the modern era, indicate that they were popular. These texts are the <em>Bird Book<\/em> (\u03a0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2), the <em>Entertaining Tale of the Four-footed Animals<\/em> (\u0394\u03b9\u03ae\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd), the <em>Synaxarion of the Honorable Donkey <\/em>(\u03a3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03be\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03b1\u03b4\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5), the <em>Fish Book<\/em> (\u039f\u03c8\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2) (in prose), and <em>The Cat and the Mice<\/em> (\u039f \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03af). These narratives form a more or less autonomous group and are only partially related to the tradition of <em>Physiologos<\/em> and the Fables of Aesop. Humor and satire characterize the lively discussions between various animals through which social, and partially political, conflicts are implied, while an attempt of social criticism can also be discerned. This group of texts is certainly of a particular interest for their language and style. Apart from that, one could trace through their lines social attitudes and mentalities. Furthermore, the scholar can detect the human approach towards animals and their behavior. However, it is important to distinguish the use and recycling of older material from the current knowledge and practices. \u00a0Moreover, for the evaluation of the texts\u2019 context, the social status and the intellectual level of the unknown authors must be taken into account. Scholars with specific interest in economic and social history of late Byzantium could find information concerning animals\u2019 use and exploitation by the society and their important role in Byzantine economy.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Remke Kruk (Leiden). <em>Marwaz\u012b&rsquo;s Book on the Natures of Animals as a Case History for the Changing Context of Aristotelian Zoological Knowledge in the Arabic Tradition.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The physician Sharaf al-Zam\u0101n \u1e6c\u0101hir al-Marwaz\u012b, fl. around 1100 C.E., worked at the court of the Seljuq sultan Maliksh\u0101h and is the author of a book on animals, or, rather, \u00ab\u00a0living beings\u00a0\u00bb. The book is divided into two parts. The first part deals with man in his various forms of appearance (prophets and mystics; male and female; geographical location), with frequent reference to Hippocrates On airs, waters and places and Galen&rsquo;s commentary on this text. Greek authors such as Aristotle and Hippocrates (Airs, Waters and Places, including Galen&rsquo;s commentary) are often cited. The second part of the work deals with animals, divided into four categories. This zoological part is noteworthy for its explicit use of a wide variety of Greek, Arabic and possibly other Middle Eastern sources. Personal observations are also included. Aristotle is well represented, and so is Timotheus of Gaza. In addition to that there is an ample amount of anecdotal information gathered from a variety of sources. The work is remarkable because it neither opts for a completely Galenic approach to the animal kingdom, as was done for instance by Ibn abi l-Ash\u2018ath (10th century), nor does it adopt the widespread model that divides its treatment of animals between anecdotal (partly pseudo-Aristotelian) information and presentation of the \u00ab\u00a0useful (or magical) properties\u00a0\u00bb\u00a0 of animals.\u00a0 I propose to discuss the unique nature of Marwaz\u012b&rsquo;s approach and to ask the question why so far no reference to the book (extant in three MSS) has been found in later sources.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Glenn A. Peers (Syracuse). <em>The Animal Media of Making Christians in the Byzantine World<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Human as a category can only exist in a space in which the animal operates as spirit and machine. Simply put, animal is the not-human category, but that category is historically determined always, and it is determined by spiritual and technological means\u2014at the same time. In the most literal ways, animal makes human: in the Byzantine tradition, St. Eustathius is transformed by an encounter with Christ in\/as\/on stag, and in converting to Christianity, he left behind his pagan name and identity. That is one significant example of transformation, but it is also about media, because the miracle comes about in art as the appearance to the about-to-be saint as an <em>icon <\/em>in\/as\/on stag. Vision and voice communicate the media in a confluence of subjects comprising animal, human, painting. This paper examines manuscript media for animal-human definition, namely the sole example in Greek of the Early Christian moralizing natural-history handbook, the now-destroyed <em>Physiologus<\/em> from Smyrna (Izmir; <em>olim<\/em> Evangelical School B.8). A particular example of Late Byzantine scientific inquiries, this manuscript has been reconstituted \u2018archaeologically\u2019 (it was destroyed in 1922, but photographs and descriptions allowed its reconstruction), but it has not been closely examined for its animal-motivated subject-formation. Animal acts, voices, and embodies divine will and presence in the made-world. It is the technology by which God can be known, and it is the spirit humans should discern for approaching human potential, <em>already<\/em> present in animal as such. Moreover, the manuscript creates the medium by which animal can be known\u2014media stores the data that comprise the media. That\u2019s to say, this manuscript is not a field manual, but media that denature understanding in vision and speech. And it shows its media integrity in the latter part of the manuscript, where divine revelation is shown to have been in effect <em>all along<\/em> through images. In the Byzantine world, material images <em>qua<\/em> icons are media of God, and that media existed before icons as such, as God appeared to Moses on Sinai specifically as icons of the Virgin Mary and Christ child (p. 166). Having been interpreted by scholars as an instrument of straightforward Christian pedagogy, this manuscript is really a medium, a discrete object that materializes vision in itself as a self-fulfilling media process.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Daniil Pleshak (St. Petersburg). <em>Animals<\/em>, <em>Theology and Political Propaganda in George of Pisida\u2019s <u>Hexameron<\/u><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>George of Pisidia is a prominent 7th century Byzantine poet. His works comprise historical epics, panegyrics, polemical and philosophical poems. Nevertheless, it was his <em>Hexamaron<\/em> that gained him the biggest following in the Medieval Greek world, as this poem survived in almost 40 manuscripts, along with Slavic and Armenian translations. Generally, the topic of <em>Hexamaron<\/em> writing is the story of creation, but George\u2019s poem mostly aims to reconcile Christian cosmology with Late antique science and a major part of the poem contains information on animal world.\u00a0 Therefore, the text provides a valuable insight in zoological knowledge of the 7th century Byzantium. The recurrent motif of the poem is an image of <strong>universal harmony created by God.<\/strong> In the proposed paper I would like to consider <strong>how George uses animal exempla to illustrate his thesis.<\/strong> Considering George of Pisidia\u2019s role of a propagandist of Imperial authority and Orthodoxy, I would also like to pay attention to political uses of zoology in the passages where he compares animals with the enemies of imperial power such as monophysites, Persians and other \u2018barbarians\u2019. The final point of interest is comparison of the poem\u2019s treatment of animals with previous Greek-language tradition of <em>Hexameron <\/em>writing presented in the works of\u00a0 Basil of Ceasaria, Gregory of Nissa and Anastasius of Sinai.<\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00c1lvaro Pires (Providence). <em>A Fiction of Nature and the Nature of Fiction: Allegory in the <u>Physiologos<\/u><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0<\/em>The <em>Physiologos<\/em> has garnered recent scholarly attention for its role in transmitting zoological knowledge in the milieu of the early Church, with a focus especially on the text\u2019s hermeneutics. This paper follows these currents by examining the interpretative methods employed by the text in generating a conception of nature as fantastical. Despite the increased focus on the literary strategies of the <em>Physiologos<\/em>, the question of fictionality in the text\u2019s presentation of zoological material has not been satisfactorily addressed. A driving question of this paper focuses on whether the text accepts the existence of the animals it describes as creatures inhabiting the material world of the senses. A variant version of the chapter on the siren and the centaur from the first redaction (13b) exemplifies this ontological ambivalence, asserting the unreality of the two creatures and labelling them an \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 while still deriving a spiritual truth from them. Late ancient Christian and Neoplatonist exegetes attest to the relation between fiction and allegoresis. Basil of Caesarea dismisses the interpretations of allegorists as harmful \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 (<em>Hexaemeron <\/em>9.1), while Origen (<em>Comm. in Cant. prol. <\/em>3.11), like Porphyry (<em>Antr. <\/em>4), employs allegory precisely to solve the interpretative closure posed by an entertaining \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1. Through comparison with the works of these exegetes, I will contextualize the interpretative strategies of the <em>Physiologos, <\/em>arguing that the text problematizes the reality of the material world it aims to illuminate. By presenting its zoological material through the medium of allegoresis, the <em>Physiologos<\/em> characterizes nature as a \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 or \u03b1\u1f34\u03bd\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Steven D. Smith (Hempstead, New York). <em>Theophylact<\/em><em> Simocatta<\/em>: <em>Zoological Lore and Sophistic Culture at the End of Antiquity<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Zoological lore abounds in the writings of the seventh century sophist and historian Theophylact Simocatta. The <em>Quaetiones physicae<\/em> and the <em>Letters<\/em> reveal that acquisition and display of zoological lore were an integral part of Theophylact\u2019s rhetorical education in Alexandria. Theophylact\u2019s primary literary models for writing about animals and for fictional epistolography were the <em>De natura animalium<\/em> and the <em>Rustic Letters<\/em> of the third century sophist Claudius Aelianus. But Theophylact\u2019s transformation of the earlier sophist\u2019s literary projects reflect the cultural contexts of the late Roman and early Byzantine world. In the <em>Quaestiones physicae<\/em>, Theophylact offers twenty explanations for natural mysteries in the form of a Platonic dialogue set in a lively fictional recreation of classical Athens. For the young sophist, figured at the beginning of the work as a swallow (\u03c7\u03b5\u03bb\u03b9\u03b4\u03ce\u03bd) that has just been taught to sing, zoological lore offers an opportunity for the performance of cultural and intellectual mastery. Social power begins, in other words, with the artful display of knowing the secrets of nature. In Theophylact\u2019s <em>Letters <\/em>from philosophers, farmers, and <em>hetairai<\/em>, zoological lore and animal fables become a medium for expressing, among other things, Neoplatonic and Christian thought, anxiety about barbarian invasions on the western front, and even the Byzantine obsession with material luxury. Form and style matter most to Theophylact, and in the <em>Letters<\/em>, animal lore gets fully integrated within the intricate artistic patterning of the collection as a whole. Zoological exempla become, in other words, part of the rhetorical tesserae that make up the compositional variation of Theophylact\u2019s glittering epistolary mosaic.<a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h3><strong>VENUE :\u00a0Travelling to Trier<\/strong><\/h3>\n<h5><strong>by plane \u2013\u00a0<\/strong><em>Airport Luxemburg :<\/em><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li>the nearest airport is Luxemburg (LUX) \u2013 about 50 km to Trier.<\/li>\n<li>there are direct connections to a lot of destinations in Europe.<\/li>\n<li>connection to Trier by bus (duration 1 h \/ 1.30 h)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>in the afternoon (starting 13.00) there is a direct connection to Trier, BUS 117, scedule:\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/bus.run.lu\/files\/media\/mobilitaet\/bus\/a-horaires\/4-rgtr\/117-15.10.2018.pdf\">https:\/\/bus.run.lu\/files\/media\/mobilitaet\/bus\/a-horaires\/4-rgtr\/117-15.10.2018.pdf\u00a0<\/a>at the last stop \u201eChristophstra\u00dfe\u201c in Trier you go to Porta Nigra and take the lokal Bus 3 to the hotel or to University (see below)<\/p>\n<p>in the morning you have to change the bus:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Bus 16 to Kirchberg, Luxexpo (every 10 minutes)<\/li>\n<li>At Kirchberg Luxexpo you go to the near Gare routi\u00e8re and take Bus 118 to Trier,\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/bus.run.lu\/files\/media\/mobilitaet\/bus\/a-horaires\/4-rgtr\/118-05.05.2019.pdf\">https:\/\/bus.run.lu\/files\/media\/mobilitaet\/bus\/a-horaires\/4-rgtr\/118-05.05.2019.pdf\u00a0<\/a>at the last stop \u201eHauptbahnhof\u201c in Trier you take Bus 3 to the hotel or University.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h5><strong>by plane \u2013\u00a0<\/strong><em>Airport Frankfurt am Main<\/em><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li>Frankfurt International Airport is about 180 km from Trier<\/li>\n<li>there are good train connections to Trier (duration 3.30 h)<\/li>\n<li>search: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.bahn.de\">www.bahn.de<\/a> (Frankfurt (M) Flughafen \u2013 Trier Hbf)<\/li>\n<li>at Trier Hauptbahnhof you take Bus 3 to the hotel or University (see below)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h5><strong>by train:<\/strong><\/h5>\n<ul>\n<li>search: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.bahn.de\">www.bahn.de<\/a> (destination: \u201eTrier Hbf\u201c)<\/li>\n<li>at Trier Hauptbahnhof you take Bus 3 to the hotel or University (see below)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h5><strong>University:<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p>Campus 1 map:<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.uni-trier.de\/fileadmin\/organisation\/Presse\/Lageplaene\/Uni_Trier_Karte_Campus_1.svg\">https:\/\/www.uni-trier.de\/fileadmin\/organisation\/Presse\/Lageplaene\/Uni_Trier_Karte_Campus_1.svg<\/a><\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"border: 0;\" src=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/maps\/embed?pb=!1m18!1m12!1m3!1d2578.1773693186137!2d6.688563444513368!3d49.745106357906415!2m3!1f0!2f0!3f0!3m2!1i1024!2i768!4f13.1!3m3!1m2!1s0x47957c753f49ff2b%3A0xf6c1c1c3ebac5527!2sUniversit%C3%A9%20de%20Tr%C3%A8ves!5e0!3m2!1sfr!2sfr!4v1567415978151!5m2!1sfr!2sfr\" width=\"600\" height=\"450\" frameborder=\"0\" allowfullscreen=\"allowfullscreen\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<h5><strong>Hotel of the participants :<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p>Schroeders Wein-Style-Hotel<br \/>\nKeuneweg 7, 54295 Trier<br \/>\nT: + 49 (0) 651 \u2013 699 846 70<br \/>\nE: info@wein-style-hotel.de<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.schroedershotels.com\/wein-style-hotel\/\">https:\/\/www.schroedershotels.com\/wein-style-hotel\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"border: 0;\" src=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/maps\/embed?pb=!1m14!1m8!1m3!1d8217.096642136255!2d6.682964866177095!3d49.75873820945959!3m2!1i1024!2i768!4f13.1!3m3!1m2!1s0x0%3A0x20c66de8a6309b75!2sWein%20Style%20Hotel!5e0!3m2!1sfr!2sfr!4v1567416052543!5m2!1sfr!2sfr\" width=\"600\" height=\"450\" frameborder=\"0\" allowfullscreen=\"allowfullscreen\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>The hotel is situated on the way from the city center to Trier University, about 3 km from Trier Hauptbahnhof (main station) and 1,5 km to the University.<br \/>\nBus Stop: \u201eAvelerhof\u201c ist just beside.<\/p>\n<h5><strong>in Trier to the hotel:<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p>Take Bus 3 (direction: Tarforst) to stop \u201eAvelerhof\u201c (every 10 minutes)<\/p>\n<p>schedule:<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5140&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full\">https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5140&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full<\/a><\/p>\n<p>(in the evening: take Bus 83 (direction: Tarforst) to stop \u201eAvelerhof\u201c (every 15 \/ 30 minutes)<\/p>\n<p>schedule:<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5170&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full\">https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5170&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full<\/a><\/p>\n<h5><strong>in Trier to University (Campus 1)<\/strong><\/h5>\n<p>Take Bus 3 (direction: Tarforst) to stop \u201eUniversit\u00e4t\u201c (every 10 minutes)<\/p>\n<p>scedule:<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5140&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full\">https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5140&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full<\/a><\/p>\n<p>(in the evening: take Bus 83 (direction: Tarforst) to stop \u201eUniversit\u00e4t\u201c (every 15 \/ 30 minutes)<\/p>\n<p>scedule:<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5170&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full\">https:\/\/www.swt.de\/swt\/Integrale?MODULE=Frontend.Media&amp;ACTION=ViewMediaObject&amp;Media.PK=5170&amp;Media.Object.ObjectType=full<\/a><\/p>\n<p>_________________________________________________________<\/p>\n<p><em><a id=\"allemand\"><\/a>Internationale Konferenz (Trier, 18.-19. Oktober 2019)<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>organisiert vom\u00a0<\/em><em>Forschungsnetzwerk <\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/\"><em>Zoomathia<\/em><\/a><em> und dem Fach <\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.uni-trier.de\/index.php?id=11036\"><em>Klassische Philologie der Universit\u00e4t Trier<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong><em>Verbreitung zoologischen Wissens in der Sp\u00e4tantike und in Byzantinischer Zeit<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><em>Aufruf zur Einreichung von Beitr\u00e4gen<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<h3>Kontext<\/h3>\n<p>Durch die Forschungen des Aristoteles und seiner Schule wird bis zum Ende 4. Jh. v. Chr. ein umfangreicher Kanon zoologischen Wissens etabliert, der in der Folgezeit nur noch partiell erweitert, jedoch in unterschiedlichsten medialen Formen rezipiert und re-pr\u00e4sentiert wird. Zoologische Texte des Hellenismus und der Kaiserzeit organisieren das zoologische Wissen in neuen Textformaten (Aristophanes v. Byzanz: Epitome, Plinius: Enzyklop\u00e4die) oder nutzen ethologische Beschreibungen\u00a0in kontrastierender Tier-Mensch-Perspektive im ethischen Diskurs (Philo, Plutarch, Aelian). Dieser Transmissions- und Transformationsprozess des zoologischen Wissens setzt sich in der Sp\u00e4tantike (und in byzantinischer Zeit) unter ver\u00e4nderten sozio-kulturellen Rahmenbedingungen fort. Die literarische Produktion dieser Epochen hat jedoch in der Forschung bisher weit weniger Aufmerksamkeit erfahren als die zoologischen Texte fr\u00fcherer Zeit.<\/p>\n<h3>Zielsetzung<\/h3>\n<p>Die geplante Trier Tagung m\u00f6chte diesen Prozess der Verbreitung und Transformation zoologischen Wissens in der Sp\u00e4tantike und in byzantinischer Zeit anhand ausgew\u00e4hlter Ph\u00e4nomene n\u00e4her analysieren. In den Blick genommen werden sollen hierzu einzelne Autoren und Texte in lateinischer, griechischer oder arabischer Sprache, ausgew\u00e4hlte Bildzeugnisse und Monumente oder \u2013 in weiterer Perspektive \u2013Textgattungen, verschiedene mediale Formen der K\u00fcnste oder auch bestimmte kulturelle Kontexte in ihrem Einfluss auf Literatur und Kunst.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Programm-Komitee<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Annetta Alexandridis, Isabelle Draelants, Cristiana Franco, Brigitte Gauvin, Oliver Hellmann, Stavros Lazaris, Baudouin Van Den Abeele, Georg W\u00f6hrle, Arnaud Zucker.<\/p>\n<p>_________________________________________________________<\/p>\n<p><strong><em><a id=\"francais\"><\/a>Conf\u00e9rence internationale de Trier (18-19 Octobre 2019)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><em>organis\u00e9e par le r\u00e9seau scientifique <\/em><\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/\"><strong><em>Zoomathia\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/a><strong><em>et le <\/em><\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.uni-trier.de\/index.php?id=11036\"><strong><em>d\u00e9partement de philologie classique de \u00a0l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Trier<\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong><em>Diffusion du savoir zoologique dans l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9 tardive et la p\u00e9riode byzantine<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><em>Appel \u00e0 communication<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<h3>Contexte<\/h3>\n<p>Les recherches conduites par Aristote et son \u00e9cole aboutissent \u00e0 la fin du IVe si\u00e8cle av. J.-C. \u00e0 la constitution d\u2019un canon imposant de connaissances zoologiques. S\u2019il est peu enrichi par la suite, il est largement diffus\u00e9 et reformul\u00e9 \u00e0 travers divers formats et genres litt\u00e9raires. Les textes zoologiques de la p\u00e9riode hell\u00e9nistique et de l&rsquo;\u00e9poque imp\u00e9riale organisent en effet le savoir zoologique dans de nouveaux types de texte (<em>Epitom\u00e9<\/em> d\u2019Aristophanes de Byzance, encyclop\u00e9die de Pline) ou exploitent et d\u00e9veloppent les descriptions \u00e9thologiques pour mettre en perspective l\u2019homme et l\u2019animal dans le discours \u00e9thique (Philon, Plutarque, Elien). Ce processus de transmission et de transformation des connaissances zoologiques se poursuit \u00e0 la fin de l&rsquo;Antiquit\u00e9 (et durant l&rsquo;\u00e9poque byzantine) dans des conditions socio-culturelles qui \u00e9voluent. La production litt\u00e9raire de ces \u00e9poques tardives a toutefois jusqu&rsquo;\u00e0 pr\u00e9sent attir\u00e9 beaucoup moins l&rsquo;attention de la recherche, que les p\u00e9riodes pr\u00e9c\u00e9dentes.<\/p>\n<h3>Objet<\/h3>\n<p>La conf\u00e9rence de Trier se propose d\u2019analyser de plus pr\u00e8s ce processus de diffusion et de transformation des connaissances zoologiques au cours de l\u2019antiquit\u00e9 tardive et de la p\u00e9riode byzantine \u00e0 partir de cas d\u2019\u00e9tudes particuliers. Seront abord\u00e9s des auteurs ou des textes significatifs, en latin, en grec ou en arabe, ainsi que des images ou des s\u00e9ries iconographiques, ou encore, dans une perspective plus large, des genres de textes ou de productions culturelles ou l\u2019influence sur la litt\u00e9rature et l&rsquo;art de certains contextes culturels.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Comit\u00e9 scientifique<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Annetta Alexandridis, Isabelle Draelants, Cristiana Franco, Brigitte Gauvin, Oliver Hellmann, Stavros Lazaris, Baudouin Van Den Abeele, Georg W\u00f6hrle, Arnaud Zucker.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Pour la Version fran\u00e7aise, cliquez ici \u00a0 | \u00a0F\u00fcr die deutsche Version klicken Sie hier Program Friday, October 18 9:15 \u00a0 Welcome &amp; Introduction (O. Hellmann &amp; A. Zucker) Session I. Animals and Literary Culture (Chair : S. Lazaris) 9:30 \u00a0 Steven D. Smith (Hempstead, New York). Theophylact Simocatta: Zoological [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":575,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,15],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/574"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=574"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/574\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":577,"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/574\/revisions\/577"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/575"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=574"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=574"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=574"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}