The Grass Snake and the Basilisk: From Pre-Christian Protective House God to the Antichrist
The grass snake owes its far northern distribution in Europe to the production and hoarding of dung from stock breeding. Dung heaps appear to be perfect breeding sites that surpass 'natural' reproduction sites in quality. Here we point out that the grass snake's dependency on manure g...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Environment and history 2014-08, Vol.20 (3), p.319-346 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 346 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 319 |
container_title | Environment and history |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Lenders, H.J. Rob Janssen, Ingo A. W. |
description | The grass snake owes its far northern distribution in Europe to the production and hoarding of dung from stock breeding. Dung heaps appear to be perfect breeding sites that surpass 'natural' reproduction sites in quality. Here we point out that the grass snake's dependency
on manure goes back to Neolithic times and that it had a reciprocal cultural effect. Moreover, the positive influence of humans on the species not only resulted from physical opportunities offered by agriculture, but also from the fact that grass snakes were considered to be chthonic deities
not to be harmed. The conversion of Europe to Christianity, however, marked the turning of the cultural tide for the species. From being a divine creature originally, the grass snake evolved into the number one symbol of the Anti-Christ: the basilisk. In spite of the subsequent witch-hunt
motivated by Christian belief, the overall historical human influence on the species was certainly not detrimental as regarded geographical distribution opportunities. This historical perspective on grass snake-human relationships adds to the discussion of whether nature conservation is better
served by a strategy of land sparing or of land sharing. It also makes clear not only that co-dependency of species is a matter of mutual biophysical advantages but that metaphysical considerations may also play a role. In this case it leads to the conclusion that bringing back the grass snake
into our direct everyday surroundings is both favourable to the grass snake and reinstates the species in our own cultural environment. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3197/096734014X14031694156367 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_jstor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_infotracacademiconefile_A432496898</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ingid>whp/eh/2014/00000020/00000003/art00003</ingid><galeid>A432496898</galeid><jstor_id>43298555</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A432496898</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-75ce0905d8b84e7825c87dd0230e440d7d22f1abc259e0f84ebb6156d90134083</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNUU2LFDEQbUTBcfUnCH300ms-O4kHZRzcXWFBwRUEDyGTrt7JbE8yJhnFf2_N9KIn0eSQStV7Ly9VTdNScs6pUS-J6RUXhIovVBBOeyOo7HmvHjQLqiTrFGH8YbM4wjrEqcfNk1K2hLCeMbJovt5soL3MrpT2U3R30Lo4tBVzb10JUyh3r9qLnHbtxwzdapNDqcFFvKUKvobv0F6lQ0GFhKx0Ii5jDf6EfNo8Gt1U4Nn9edZ8vnh3s7rqrj9cvl8trzsvhaqdkh6IIXLQay1AaSa9VsOAvgkIQQY1MDZSt_ZMGiAjYtbrHj85GELxR5qfNS9m3X1O3w5Qqt2F4mGaXAR0Z2kvqOb8CP8nFHtndG-MQuj5DL11E9gQx1Sz87gH2AWfIowB80vBmTC9Nkcbeib4nErJMNp9DjuXf1pK7HFW9m-zQuqbmTphS_M-pWmfoRS7TYccsXX_o_B8VtiWmvLvl9Gd0VJKrL-e6yHeQqzuj_SPzd7CxjIUteS0GLkPCLcu11PAfwFHJbTJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1563986997</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Grass Snake and the Basilisk: From Pre-Christian Protective House God to the Antichrist</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Lenders, H.J. Rob ; Janssen, Ingo A. W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lenders, H.J. Rob ; Janssen, Ingo A. W.</creatorcontrib><description>The grass snake owes its far northern distribution in Europe to the production and hoarding of dung from stock breeding. Dung heaps appear to be perfect breeding sites that surpass 'natural' reproduction sites in quality. Here we point out that the grass snake's dependency
on manure goes back to Neolithic times and that it had a reciprocal cultural effect. Moreover, the positive influence of humans on the species not only resulted from physical opportunities offered by agriculture, but also from the fact that grass snakes were considered to be chthonic deities
not to be harmed. The conversion of Europe to Christianity, however, marked the turning of the cultural tide for the species. From being a divine creature originally, the grass snake evolved into the number one symbol of the Anti-Christ: the basilisk. In spite of the subsequent witch-hunt
motivated by Christian belief, the overall historical human influence on the species was certainly not detrimental as regarded geographical distribution opportunities. This historical perspective on grass snake-human relationships adds to the discussion of whether nature conservation is better
served by a strategy of land sparing or of land sharing. It also makes clear not only that co-dependency of species is a matter of mutual biophysical advantages but that metaphysical considerations may also play a role. In this case it leads to the conclusion that bringing back the grass snake
into our direct everyday surroundings is both favourable to the grass snake and reinstates the species in our own cultural environment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0967-3407</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1752-7023</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3197/096734014X14031694156367</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Isle of Harris, UK: The White Horse Press</publisher><subject>Agriculture ; Animal tales ; Christian symbolism ; Christianity ; Eggs ; Environment ; Europe ; Feces ; Folk Tales ; Folktales ; Grasses ; Historical analysis ; Human ecology ; Iron age ; Lenders ; Metaphysics ; Methods ; Motivation ; Natrix Natrix ; Nature conservation ; Nature Conservation Strategies ; Religion ; Religious beliefs ; Snakes ; Symbolism</subject><ispartof>Environment and history, 2014-08, Vol.20 (3), p.319-346</ispartof><rights>2014 The White Horse Press</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2014 The White Horse Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-75ce0905d8b84e7825c87dd0230e440d7d22f1abc259e0f84ebb6156d90134083</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/43298555$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/43298555$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lenders, H.J. Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janssen, Ingo A. W.</creatorcontrib><title>The Grass Snake and the Basilisk: From Pre-Christian Protective House God to the Antichrist</title><title>Environment and history</title><description>The grass snake owes its far northern distribution in Europe to the production and hoarding of dung from stock breeding. Dung heaps appear to be perfect breeding sites that surpass 'natural' reproduction sites in quality. Here we point out that the grass snake's dependency
on manure goes back to Neolithic times and that it had a reciprocal cultural effect. Moreover, the positive influence of humans on the species not only resulted from physical opportunities offered by agriculture, but also from the fact that grass snakes were considered to be chthonic deities
not to be harmed. The conversion of Europe to Christianity, however, marked the turning of the cultural tide for the species. From being a divine creature originally, the grass snake evolved into the number one symbol of the Anti-Christ: the basilisk. In spite of the subsequent witch-hunt
motivated by Christian belief, the overall historical human influence on the species was certainly not detrimental as regarded geographical distribution opportunities. This historical perspective on grass snake-human relationships adds to the discussion of whether nature conservation is better
served by a strategy of land sparing or of land sharing. It also makes clear not only that co-dependency of species is a matter of mutual biophysical advantages but that metaphysical considerations may also play a role. In this case it leads to the conclusion that bringing back the grass snake
into our direct everyday surroundings is both favourable to the grass snake and reinstates the species in our own cultural environment.</description><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Animal tales</subject><subject>Christian symbolism</subject><subject>Christianity</subject><subject>Eggs</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Feces</subject><subject>Folk Tales</subject><subject>Folktales</subject><subject>Grasses</subject><subject>Historical analysis</subject><subject>Human ecology</subject><subject>Iron age</subject><subject>Lenders</subject><subject>Metaphysics</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Natrix Natrix</subject><subject>Nature conservation</subject><subject>Nature Conservation Strategies</subject><subject>Religion</subject><subject>Religious beliefs</subject><subject>Snakes</subject><subject>Symbolism</subject><issn>0967-3407</issn><issn>1752-7023</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNUU2LFDEQbUTBcfUnCH300ms-O4kHZRzcXWFBwRUEDyGTrt7JbE8yJhnFf2_N9KIn0eSQStV7Ly9VTdNScs6pUS-J6RUXhIovVBBOeyOo7HmvHjQLqiTrFGH8YbM4wjrEqcfNk1K2hLCeMbJovt5soL3MrpT2U3R30Lo4tBVzb10JUyh3r9qLnHbtxwzdapNDqcFFvKUKvobv0F6lQ0GFhKx0Ii5jDf6EfNo8Gt1U4Nn9edZ8vnh3s7rqrj9cvl8trzsvhaqdkh6IIXLQay1AaSa9VsOAvgkIQQY1MDZSt_ZMGiAjYtbrHj85GELxR5qfNS9m3X1O3w5Qqt2F4mGaXAR0Z2kvqOb8CP8nFHtndG-MQuj5DL11E9gQx1Sz87gH2AWfIowB80vBmTC9Nkcbeib4nErJMNp9DjuXf1pK7HFW9m-zQuqbmTphS_M-pWmfoRS7TYccsXX_o_B8VtiWmvLvl9Gd0VJKrL-e6yHeQqzuj_SPzd7CxjIUteS0GLkPCLcu11PAfwFHJbTJ</recordid><startdate>20140801</startdate><enddate>20140801</enddate><creator>Lenders, H.J. Rob</creator><creator>Janssen, Ingo A. W.</creator><general>The White Horse Press</general><general>White Horse Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>C18</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140801</creationdate><title>The Grass Snake and the Basilisk: From Pre-Christian Protective House God to the Antichrist</title><author>Lenders, H.J. Rob ; Janssen, Ingo A. W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-75ce0905d8b84e7825c87dd0230e440d7d22f1abc259e0f84ebb6156d90134083</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Animal tales</topic><topic>Christian symbolism</topic><topic>Christianity</topic><topic>Eggs</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Feces</topic><topic>Folk Tales</topic><topic>Folktales</topic><topic>Grasses</topic><topic>Historical analysis</topic><topic>Human ecology</topic><topic>Iron age</topic><topic>Lenders</topic><topic>Metaphysics</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Natrix Natrix</topic><topic>Nature conservation</topic><topic>Nature Conservation Strategies</topic><topic>Religion</topic><topic>Religious beliefs</topic><topic>Snakes</topic><topic>Symbolism</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lenders, H.J. Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janssen, Ingo A. W.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Humanities Index</collection><jtitle>Environment and history</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lenders, H.J. Rob</au><au>Janssen, Ingo A. W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Grass Snake and the Basilisk: From Pre-Christian Protective House God to the Antichrist</atitle><jtitle>Environment and history</jtitle><date>2014-08-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>319</spage><epage>346</epage><pages>319-346</pages><issn>0967-3407</issn><eissn>1752-7023</eissn><abstract>The grass snake owes its far northern distribution in Europe to the production and hoarding of dung from stock breeding. Dung heaps appear to be perfect breeding sites that surpass 'natural' reproduction sites in quality. Here we point out that the grass snake's dependency
on manure goes back to Neolithic times and that it had a reciprocal cultural effect. Moreover, the positive influence of humans on the species not only resulted from physical opportunities offered by agriculture, but also from the fact that grass snakes were considered to be chthonic deities
not to be harmed. The conversion of Europe to Christianity, however, marked the turning of the cultural tide for the species. From being a divine creature originally, the grass snake evolved into the number one symbol of the Anti-Christ: the basilisk. In spite of the subsequent witch-hunt
motivated by Christian belief, the overall historical human influence on the species was certainly not detrimental as regarded geographical distribution opportunities. This historical perspective on grass snake-human relationships adds to the discussion of whether nature conservation is better
served by a strategy of land sparing or of land sharing. It also makes clear not only that co-dependency of species is a matter of mutual biophysical advantages but that metaphysical considerations may also play a role. In this case it leads to the conclusion that bringing back the grass snake
into our direct everyday surroundings is both favourable to the grass snake and reinstates the species in our own cultural environment.</abstract><cop>Isle of Harris, UK</cop><pub>The White Horse Press</pub><doi>10.3197/096734014X14031694156367</doi><tpages>28</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0967-3407 |
ispartof | Environment and history, 2014-08, Vol.20 (3), p.319-346 |
issn | 0967-3407 1752-7023 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_gale_infotracacademiconefile_A432496898 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy |
subjects | Agriculture Animal tales Christian symbolism Christianity Eggs Environment Europe Feces Folk Tales Folktales Grasses Historical analysis Human ecology Iron age Lenders Metaphysics Methods Motivation Natrix Natrix Nature conservation Nature Conservation Strategies Religion Religious beliefs Snakes Symbolism |
title | The Grass Snake and the Basilisk: From Pre-Christian Protective House God to the Antichrist |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T12%3A56%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_jstor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Grass%20Snake%20and%20the%20Basilisk:%20From%20Pre-Christian%20Protective%20House%20God%20to%20the%20Antichrist&rft.jtitle=Environment%20and%20history&rft.au=Lenders,%20H.J.%20Rob&rft.date=2014-08-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=319&rft.epage=346&rft.pages=319-346&rft.issn=0967-3407&rft.eissn=1752-7023&rft_id=info:doi/10.3197/096734014X14031694156367&rft_dat=%3Cgale_jstor%3EA432496898%3C/gale_jstor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1563986997&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A432496898&rft_ingid=whp/eh/2014/00000020/00000003/art00003&rft_jstor_id=43298555&rfr_iscdi=true |