Exotic animals

A young Indian grey mongoose pup (Herpestesedwardsi) was presented to University
Veterinary Hospital, Mannuthy, KVASU with history of automobile accident. Symphyseal and
transverse fracture of the left mandible was diagnosed. Inter dental and Interfragmental wiringwas performed under general anaesthesia. After three weeks of stabilisation, full
healing with normal feed intake was observed.

This dissertation investigates Roman conceptions of the ’wild’ by analysing evidence for exotic animals. As no comparable studies exist this dissertation fills a gap in research providing information that can potentially be used to enhance our understanding of the Roman view(s) of the world. The study of exotic animal remains and mosaics on which they are depicted concentrates on modern-day Italy, France, and Britain as well as the ancient Rhine/Danube provinces. The division of the research areas into three zones according to their distance to the animals’ origins (core, provincial, and periphery) ensures the study of patterns unique to each area aiding the investigation of the following research question: What does the trade of exotic animals reveal about Roman conceptions of the ‘wild’? The combination of evidence from the zooarchaeological record and mosaics suggests that the ‘wild’ was conceptualised in at least two ways. One of them, indicated by the cluster of exotic animal bones in Rome, is connected to imperialism and the belief in the superiority of humans over the ‘wild’. The second conception is more appreciative and gentle. This becomes most evident in the keeping of Barbary macaques as companion animals as is indicated by the evidence investigated.

Regarding other species than our own in the modern world, there are only 3 possibilities: private ownership, zoological and similar institutions, and preserves. They all have certain advantages and disadvantages. Some are termed, " exotic " , and some, " domestic " , although the distinction is not always very clear. In layman's terms, exotic often means species taken from the wild whereas domesticated basically means species raised by people that no longer occur in the wild. In reality, exotics are first generation wild species either in captivity or relocated but living freely outside of their natural range. Domestics are species raised and bred in captivity by use of animal husbandry as opposed to maintaining them in the natural ecosystem from which they arose. Technically, then, " pets " raised in captivity, whether dogs or pythons, are both " domestic species ". Advantages of private ownership: Private ownership of exotic or domestic species allows the individual to focus on some species of personal interest. Doesn't have to be the flashiest or best known. Private ownership can also entail breeding the species. Captive bred animals are always healthier than their wild counterparts, and therefore better to acquire, which takes pressure off wild populations given enough captive bred individuals to supply the pet trade. Examples of successful dispersal of exotic species in captivity include bearded dragons, leopard geckos, corn snakes, and ball pythons. There are many others. Disadvantages of private ownership: Most exotic animals (e.g.taken from the wild) will die due to poor husbandry (the owners don't take proper care of them, either from ignorance, unwilling to make the investment in time or money, or they simply get tired of them). Private owners of exotic species are not organized, and frequently seem to be in competition for attention or sales, as opposed to working together to benefit the species. The most successful private owners are typically one-off. In other words, they invest tremendous time and money to achieve husbandry needs (learn how to keep them in captivity) and breed multiple generations, but their attainments are lost with their passing. They don't pass the torch. It was something they did just for their own satisfaction. Obviously this is in contrast to better known pets, like dogs, cats, horses, etc., that have breeding registries, specialty groups, sporting or show competitions, etc. Zoos and Sanctuaries: Zoos have many pro's and con's. Sanctuaries not so much necessarily. Zoos are typically actively engaged in conservation of their species. Sanctuaries are more commonly a place for refugees to live comfortably, but may not have any type of breeding or long-range plan in place and the species probably are kept in the natural habitat where they arose. Advantages of Zoos: Zoos are one of the few places where the average person can personally see exotic animals from distant places in vivo. Establishes a direct connection to exotic animals and people. Offer lots of information for visitors about their resident animals that most people will never see in their local paper or any other popular media source. Zoos often coordinate the breeding of target species with other zoos in order to maintain a more diverse, e.g. not inbred, strain of individuals. Many zoos are also now working with preserves in areas where they assist local communities in maintaining target species in situ through eco-tourism, direct donations, and with husbandry expertise. Disadvantages of Zoos: Zoos tend to target the larger, flashier, and sometimes, easier to display species of animals, as opposed to worrying about smaller, more difficult species that are just as endangered in the wild. Zoos don't have the money to ensure the preservation and perpetuation of any given species very far into the future as most are dependent upon donations and gate receipts in order to fund their operations. These sources, of course, vary with the economy. In spite of zoo breeding programs, they tend to breed animals simply to keep the genome of the species as diverse as possible, which is not the way it actually works in nature, where a dominant individual of a species, often male, makes the effective breedings for the whole group, sometimes for many years. Of

From Antiquity onwards, the demand for exotic animals has been met demonstrably on a large scale. Rulers especially regarded the possession of these animals as a means to demonstrate their influence on and superiority over third parties. As it were, gifting exotic animals was considered a diplomatic means. This intention continued through the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period. However, was the selection of these rarities changed over time. Access to foreign goods increased especially with the discovery of new sea routes. As it were, the interest in owning such items increased at the same time.
Rulers built menageries and organised animal fights, scholars studied exotic animals and attempted to impose a systematic order on them. Private individuals came into the possession of apes or monkeys, parrots, parakeets or turtles and tortoises, and thereby increased their reputation. Agents acted as procurers, intermediaries and collectors,
and at the same time boosted demand through their supply. Countless exotic animals were brought to Europe, dead or alive. The journey by ship was unbearable for humans and animals alike, and ended in high mortality rates for the majority of animals.
Written sources provide a comprehensive insight into the need for exotic goods, they also allow concrete statements on procurement and placement. The transport of so-called exotica, however, has so far received little attention. Especially in archaeology, the subject of supply and demand of exotic animals seemingly leaves much to be
desired, something that will be addressed by the following contribution, with special consideration given to apes and monkeys.

1    Historically, humans have translocated some species of Leporidae (order Lagomorpha) around the world as an introduced food source and as game species. This family is now cosmopolitan and occupies areas where it did not previously exist. With the exception of European rabbits Oryctolagus cuniculus, evidence of the effects of these introduced species is scattered and in many cases anecdotal, though they share many biological traits with Oryctolagus cuniculus, one of the most harmful invasive species worldwide.
2    We review available studies on the 12 leporid species that have been introduced by humans to areas beyond their native ranges. Our aim is to describe and compare the species’ ecological roles in their native geographic ranges and in their exotic ranges. We review the species’ effects on the ecosystem at different levels of the trophic chain. We also evaluate the consequences of introductions for animal and human health, and their economic consequences, and we consider control measures.
3    In their native ranges, the 12 leporids are known to provide resources for other species, act as seed dispersers and ecosystem engineers, function as primary prey items for several predator species, and have many other functions. The effects of the leporids in their exotic geographic ranges are also conspicuous, and in many cases strongly negative, due to competition with native fauna and the facilitation of the presence of other invaders. Nonetheless, they constitute a food resource for native and exotic predators. As game species for humans, their hunting may indirectly impact the ecosystems by increasing the amount of lead in the environment. Moreover, they may be carriers of zoonotic diseases.
4    Conservation biologists should carefully consider the contrasting effects of the introduced leporids species in the ecosystem before developing any management strategy including these species.

In recent years, humanists and social scientists have shown increasing interest in human-animal relations – to the point where many now speak of an ‘animal turn’ in the humanities and social sciences. Across history, psychology, anthropology, literature, sociology, philosophy, and law, an interdisciplinary field of human-animal studies has been forming. Certain common themes run through this diverse field, not least the reproduction of human-animal difference, and the conditions and the implications thereof.

Despite the long history of language use as a marker of such difference, the academic quest to investigate the boundary between human and nonhuman has, somewhat surprisingly, not taken root within rhetorical studies – at least not until now. For this edited volume, we therefore call for chapters that investigate the place of nonhuman animals in the purview of rhetorical theory; what it would mean to communicate beyond the human community; how rhetoric reveals our ‘brute roots.’ In other words, this book invites contributions which enlighten us about likely or possible implications of the animal turn within rhetorical studies. Would such a turn imply, for instance, that rhetoric needs a nonanthropocentric reconfiguration? The question, perhaps, is this: What difference would it make to the discipline if we assumed that nonhuman forms of communication were as interesting as human ones?

The article presents some thoughts about the cosmetic palette New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Acc.-No. 10.176.78 and a new interpretation of the piece. It can be interpreted as a depiction of a two-headed turtle, a representation of a real-life reptile. It dates back to the fourth millennium BC and for this reason, the depiction of dicephalic animals can count as very old. This interpretation can be expanded to palettes depicting two-headed birds.

Echt tierisch!: Die Menagerie des F € ursten. Sabine Haag, ed.
Exh. Cat. Innsbruck: Schloss Ambras. Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna, 2015

Beautifully illustrated and featuring painstaking new research, this exhibition catalogue is a very welcome addition to the scholarship on Habsburg collectors, and broadly impacts our understanding of the significant roles played by exotic and domestic animals in early modern court culture. Featuring six short essays and catalogue entries for the objects featured in the 2015 exhibition by the same name, the catalogue brings together a wealth of visual and textual information, some hitherto unpublished. Beyond its significance for art historians who seek to contextualize depictions of animals, there is much to recommend for those whose research interests include collecting and display, voyages of exploration, natural history enterprises, and aspects of politics and diplomacy in the early modern era. As is highlighted by the catalogue essays, collecting animals was a priority for many early modern rulers, not just the princes (F € ursten) indicated by the exhibition title. Kings, queens, and emperors including Manuel I, king of Portugal (1469–1521); Catherine of Austria, queen of Portugal (1507–58); Maximillian II, Holy Roman emperor (1527–76); and Rudolf II, Holy Roman emperor (1552–1612); and their collections are all discussed. Special emphasis is given to Ferdinand II, archduke of Austria (1529–95), which is entirely appropriate given that the venue for the exhibition, Schloss Ambras, was his former residence—Ferdinand's menageries for the exotic and farms for the domestic are the subject of three of the essays and the majority of the catalogue entries. Detailing the many motivations of Habsburg rulers for maintaining menageries and aviaries is no less complex than the Habsburg genealogy that supported such enterprises. Emergent themes include animals and birds (alive and dead) as trophies and signs of prestige, tributes from vassals, and diplomatic gifts; and how envoys, ambassadors and merchants, traveled from Lisbon, Vienna, Prague, and Innsbruck to distant Asian, African, and American locations in pursuit of creatures who often served as intermediaries between courts and cultures. This is an early instance of a global market and exchange, and as the Habsburgs gathered together exotica (especially rhinoceroses, elephants, monkeys, camels, and big cats) they equally asserted the significance of their political dynasty. When the whole animal could not be obtained, a part (such as a rhinoceros horn or an ostrich egg) or a depiction (in print or paint) acted as a surrogate. Domestic animals (dogs, birds, goats, pigs, horses) were vital for companionship and the sustenance of the court, while game (deer, boars, rabbits) filled the reserves near royal residences, giving enthusiastic Habsburg hunters convenient grounds for sport. The catalogue includes objects that would have featured prominently at court as highly desired collectors' items: vessels, cups and goblets made of animal parts (such as

Edited by Arthur MacGregor, University of Oxford
Interposed between the natural world in all its diversity and the edited form in which we encounter it in literature, imagery and the museum, lie the multiple practices of the naturalists in selecting, recording and preserving the specimens from which our world view is to be reconstituted. The factors that weigh at every stage are here dissected, analysed and set within a historical narrative that spans more than five centuries. During that era, every aspect evolved and changed, as engagement with nature moved from a speculative pursuit heavily influenced by classical scholarship to a systematic science, drawing on advanced theory and technology. Far from being neutrally objective, the process of representing nature is shown as fraught with constraint and compromise.

With a Foreword by Sir David Attenborough

Contributors are: Marie Addyman, Peter Barnard, Paul D. Brinkman, Ian Convery, Peter Davis, Felix Driver, Florike Egmond, Annemarie Jordan Gschwend, Geoff Hancock, Stephen Harris, Hanna Hodacs, Stuart Houston, Dominik Huenniger, Rob Huxley, Charlie Jarvis, Malgosia Nowak-Kemp, Shepard Krech III, Mark Lawley, Arthur Lucas, Marco Masseti, Geoff Moore, Pat Morris, Charles Nelson, Robert Peck, Helen Scales, Han F. Vermeulen, and Glyn Williams.

The contribution deals with an unusual aspect of the symbolism of Frederick II's imperial power, closely related to the sacred and christological value of the image of the elephant and more widely of its imperial menagerie.
The presence of exotic animals in Frederick II's processions was meticulously programmed and corresponded to ​​the emperor's idea to influence the imaginary of the people with the show off of rare and curious beasts.
The aim of the study is to demonstrate how Frederick II, through sources, sumptuary artifacts and artistic works, exploited the religious image of some of these animals to convey a clear message of imperial power, not separated from the sacred and christian ones, but closely linked to these. Frederick II chose something that in the collective imaginary, from sovereigns of time to devout people, must have a similar religious meaning but worthy of an emperor as elephant iconography is. For a sovereign consistently described by papal propaganda as the antichrist, using it in his processions, giving it as a gift but also simply presenting the mastodontic animal, the symbol of the religiousness that was contested but at the same time the allegorical image of Christ and emperors, is a clear message of ideal legitimation. (Il contributo si occupa di un aspetto insolito della simbologia del potere imperiale federiciano strettamente connesso con la valenza sacra e cristologica dell’immagine dell’elefante e più diffusamente del suo serraglio imperiale.
La presenza degli animali esotici nei cortei federiciani era minuziosamente programmata e corrispondeva all’idea dell’imperatore di influenzare l’immaginario della gente cn lo sfoggio di bestie rare e curiose.
L’intento dello studio è quello di dimostrare come Federico II, attraverso fonti, manufatti suntuari e opere artistiche, sfruttò l’immagine religiosa di alcuni di questi animali per veicolare un chiaro messaggio di potenza imperiale, non disgiunta da quella sacra e cristiana, ma strettamente connessa a essa. Federico scelse qualcosa che nell’immaginario collettivo, dai potenti dell’epoca al popolo devoto, doveva avere un consimile significato religioso ma degno di un imperatore ovvero l’iconografia dell’elefante. Per un sovrano costantemente descritto dalla propaganda papale come l’anticristo, utilizzare nei suoi cortei, far dono, ma anche far semplicemente mostra del mastodontico animale, simbolo stesso della religiosità che gli veniva contestata ma al contempo immagine allegorica del Cristo e degli imperatori, aveva una chiaro messaggio di legittimazione ideale).

Se reconoce que los hurones domésticos (Mustela putorios furo) son susceptibles a la toxoplasmosis, pero la información al respecto es escasa. Se describe el caso de un hurón hembra de 6.5 años de edad llevado a consulta a la Clínica de Animales Silvestres y Exóticos de la Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (Lima, Perú), por presentar
anorexia y diarrea reciente. El examen físico reveló deshidratación, bradicardia, hipotermia y letargia. El examen hematológico reveló leucocitosis, neutrofilia y trombocitopenia. El examen bioquímico sérico reveló hipoglucemia y elevación de la creatina quinasa. Se detectó IgG e IgM anti-Toxoplasma mediante la prueba de Hemaglutinación Indirecta. El hurón falleció dos días después de iniciar la terapia y no se permitió realizar el examen post mortem.
It is known that domestic ferrets (Mustela putorios furo) are susceptible to toxoplasmosis; however, information is scarce. This report describes the case of a 6.5 years old female ferret received at the Wild and Exotic Animals Clinic of the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (Lima, Peru), which presented recent anorexia and diarrhoea. Physical examination revealed dehydration, bradycardia, hypothermia, and lethargy. Haematology revealed leucocytosis, neutrophilia, and thrombocytopenia. Serum biochemistry revealed hypoglycaemia and increased creatine kinase. Anti-Toxoplasma IgM and IgG were found by Indirect Hemagglutination assay. The ferret died two days after therapy was established and post mortem examination was not allowed.

The poet Jean de La Fontaine famously dedicated his Fables in 1668 to Louis XIV's son, declaring in verse that "animals I choose/to proffer lessons that we all might use." Less well known is that La Fontaine's Fables appeared within a peak moment of cultural production about animals, the work of a small, but privileged coterie of writers, artists, philosophers, physicians, and scientists. In this book, Peter Sahlins argues that the animals of 1668 helped to shift an entire way of thinking about the relationship of animals and humans -- what Sahlins calls "Renaissance humanimalism" -- toward more recognizably modern expressions of classical naturalism. At the same time, Louis XIV used the animals of his newly constructed Versailles menagerie and of the Royal Labyrinth to transform the symbolic language of French absolutism. In the aftermath of 1668, Louis XIV adopted a new model of sovereignty in which the absolute authority of the king is justified by the bestial nature of his human subjects.

1668: The Year of the Animal in France is a unique interdisciplinary study with rich visual documentation and interpretation of the symbolic lives and afterlives of the animal kingdom at Versailles and Paris. Sahlins observes these animals in their natural habitats, in the animal palace designed by Louis Le Vau, the paintings and tapestries of Charles Le Brun, the garden installations of André Le Nôtre, the writings of Charles Perrault his brother Claude, the poetry of Madeleine de Scudéry, the philosophy of René Descartes, the engravings of Sébastien Leclerc, and the transfusion experiments of Jean Denis and others. Sahlins brings together the nonhuman and human agents of 1668 -- porcupines and painters, swans and scientists, egrets and engravers, cranes and craftsmen -- and discovers the critical importance of animals in 1668 in a book that will transform the fields of human-animal studies and early modern French history.