Domestic Animals and Their Uses
Domestic Animals and Their Uses
复制标题
家畜及其用途
DOI：
10.1002/9780470998861.ch20
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
0.4
通讯作者：
A. Grant
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Grant
罗马裔英国农民的日常生活不可避免地与他们的庄稼和牲畜的饲养密切相关，但动物也直接或间接地影响到生活在罗马不列颠的每一个男人、女人或儿童的生活的许多方面。需要建筑物来安置和管理动物决定了农场和别墅的布局，农作物种植必须考虑到动物放牧和饲料需求，城镇、村庄和军事定居点的位置受到骑马旅行或用动物手推车运送货物的距离的影响。许多工匠和店主依赖动物产品，牧师和女祭司需要动物来进行必要的仪式和仪式，大多数人的衣服会包括羊毛或皮革制品，尽管可能不是大多数，但所消费的食物中会有来自动物的配料，动物脂肪提供照明，一些动物传播疾病，其他动物是宠物，等等。可以阐明人类与动物相互作用的复杂性和范围的历史的证据来源非常广泛，包括文件、图像、结构、人工制品和生态文物。在这里尝试一个基础广泛的总结是愚蠢的；本章主要集中在出土的动物遗骸提供的信息，并建立在作者(Grant 1989)和其他人，特别是Tony King和Mark Maltby(见参考文献)早期工作的基础上。它在选择讨论的主题上必然是有选择性的，而且也有地理上的偏见，因为大多数大型的、确定日期的和全面研究的动物群来自英格兰中部和南部。最近有很多理论上的辩论，关于应用于英国的罗马人的含义，以及任何罗马化过程在日常活动和人类身份方面可能意味着什么。最近关于身份认同的后殖民辩论将罗马人与凯尔特人、殖民者与抵抗者放在一起，这样的辩论对于帮助我们挑战关于不列颠罗马化的简单化假设是重要的(例如，韦伯斯特和库珀1996)。还有其他的解释框架。伍尔夫(1998：206)认为，罗马人和高卢人的身份只有在罗马征服的最早阶段才明显对立，而
The daily lives of Romano-British farmers were inevitably intimately linked to the husbandry of their crops and livestock, but animals also impacted directly or indirectly on many aspects of the lives of every man, woman or child living in Roman Britain. The need for buildings to house and manage animals dictated the layout of farms and villas, crop cultivation had to take account of animal grazing and fodder requirements, the location of towns, villages and military settlements was influenced by the distances it was possible to travel by horse, or move goods in animal-drawn carts. Many craftsmen and shopkeepers were dependent on animal products, priests and priestesses needed animals in order to perform essential rites and rituals, the clothing of most of the population would have included woollen or leather items, much, although perhaps not the majority, of the food consumed would have included ingredients that were animal in origin, animal fat provided illumination, some animals spread disease, others were pets and so the list goes on. The sources of evidence that can illuminate the history of the complexity and scope of human–animal interactions is very broad, encompassing documents, images, structures, artefacts and ecofacts. It would be foolish here to attempt a broad-based summary; this chapter concentrates primarily on the information provided by excavated animal remains and builds on earlier work by this author (Grant 1989) and that of others, particularly Tony King and Mark Maltby (see bibliography). It is necessarily selective in the topics chosen for discussion and also has a geographical bias as the majority of large, well-dated and comprehensively studied faunal assemblages are from the Midlands and the south.There has been much recent theoretical debate about the meaning of ‘Roman’as applied to Britain, and what any process of Romanization might imply in terms of both everyday activities and human identity. Recent post-colonial debates about identity place Roman against Celt, colonist against resister, and such debates are important in helping us to challenge simplistic assumptions about the Romanization of Britain (for example, Webster and Cooper 1996). There are also other interpretational frameworks. Woolf (1998: 206) argues that the Roman and Gallic identities were clearly in opposition only in the earliest stages of Roman conquest, and that other contrasts in