![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.cepam.cnrs.fr\/sites\/zoomathia\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/6\/2022\/07\/V2-Intaille-BnF-de-Clercq-n\u00b0-3497-fourmi.jpg\")
English version :<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Even before the invention of the microscope, which was decisive in their case, insects and other arthropods received attention and vigilance in the philosophico-scientific literature, sometimes in a remarkable way. While ancient and medieval medical works reduced them almost to the status of pests, Aristotle examined their modes of generation, their metamorphoses, the diet and social behavior of some of them and tried to understand their anatomical coherence and to limit their disparity. For \u00ab\u00a0in absolutely all animals there is something natural, that is to say, beautiful\u00a0\u00bb (Aristotle, PA<\/em>645a22-3). Four centuries later, Pliny in his Natural History<\/em>, devoted an entire book (11) to them, on the basis of Greek works. The insecta, minutae <\/em>or vermes<\/em>, underserved by their size and their apparent uselessness or harmfulness, seem to be a poor world, reduced to a few leading genera, which symbolism regularly \u00ab\u00a0pins down\u00a0\u00bb, from the biblical or Homeric epics to the bestiaries and commentaries of the Physiologus<\/em> tradition. The encyclopedists of the \u00ab\u00a0Golden Age\u00a0\u00bb (1180-1260) seem to have renewed an extensive interest in nature, including insects. They sometimes catalogue and scrutinize them with a new attention. Through both the knowledge and the uses to which they give rise and develop, this issue intends to focus on the humble and the lowly of ancient and medieval fauna.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Contributions for this issue sent to the editorial staff of RursuSpicae will be peer-reviewed.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Version fran\u00e7aise :<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n M\u00eame avant l\u2019invention, d\u00e9cisive \u00e0 leur \u00e9gard, du microscope, les insectes et autres arthropodes ont fait l\u2019objet d\u2019une attention et d\u2019une vigilance parfois remarquables dans la litt\u00e9rature philosophico-scientifique. Si les \u0153uvres m\u00e9dicales antiques et m\u00e9di\u00e9vales les r\u00e9duisaient quasiment au statut de nuisibles, Aristote se penche sur leurs modes de g\u00e9n\u00e9ration, leurs m\u00e9tamorphoses, le r\u00e9gime et le comportement social de certains d\u2019entre eux et tente de concevoir leur coh\u00e9rence anatomique et de limiter leur disparate. Car \u00ab chez absolument tous les animaux il y a quelque chose de naturel, c\u2019est-\u00e0-dire de beau \u00bb (Aristote, PA<\/em> 645a22-3). Pline, quatre si\u00e8cles plus tard, sur la base des travaux grecs, leur consacre un livre entier (11) de son Histoire naturelle. <\/em>Les insecta, minutae<\/em> ou vermes, <\/em>desservis par leur taille et leur apparente inutilit\u00e9 ou nocivit\u00e9, semblent un monde pauvre et r\u00e9duit \u00e0 quelques genres vedettes, que la symbolique \u00ab \u00e9pingle \u00bb r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement, depuis les \u00e9pop\u00e9es bibliques ou hom\u00e9riques jusqu\u2019aux bestiaires et commentaires de la tradition du Physiologus<\/em>. Les encyclop\u00e9distes du \u00ab si\u00e8cle d\u2019or \u00bb (1180-1260) semblent renouer avec un int\u00e9r\u00eat extensif pour la nature incluant les insectes qu\u2019ils cataloguent et scrutent parfois avec une attention nouvelle. Ce num\u00e9ro entend mettre l\u2019accent sur les humbles et les sans grades de la faune antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale, \u00e0 travers \u00e0 la fois les savoirs et les usages auxquels ils donnent lieu et d\u00e9veloppement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Les contributions pour ce num\u00e9ro th\u00e9matique envoy\u00e9es \u00e0 la r\u00e9daction de RursuSpicae feront l\u2019objet d\u2019une \u00e9valuation par peer-review.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Source : <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Version fran\u00e7aise : https:\/\/journals.openedition.org\/rursuspicae\/1648<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n