Browse results
Extreme Klimaereignisse und Hungerkatastrophen zählen zu den kontinuierlichsten Problemen, mit denen sich Menschen durch alle Zeiten hindurch auseinandersetzen mussten. Gleichzeitig sind sie eng verflochten mit zeitlichen, räumlichen und gesellschaftlichen Bedingungen. Mit Methoden der historischen Hungerforschung und dem da etablierten Vulnerabiltitätskonzept werden die Texte der Hebräischen Bibel danach befragt, wie die Menschen extreme Klimaereignisse wahrgenommen, gedeutet und bewältigt haben. Dabei zeigt sich, dass die Texte nie einfache, monokausale Erklärungen bereithalten, sondern sich auf eine Reihe von unterschiedlichen, teilweise widersprüchlichen Aussagen stützen. Gott, Mensch und Natur erscheinen in dieser Vorstellung als Akteure, die miteinander agieren und die Katastrophe gleichermaßen mitverantworten.
Extreme climate events and famines are among the most continuous problems that humans have had to deal with throughout the ages. At the same time, they are closely intertwined with temporal, spatial and social conditions. Using methods of historical hunger research and the established concept of vulnerability, this study examines the texts of the Hebrew Bible to determine how people perceived, interpreted and coped with extreme climate events. In doing so, it becomes apparent that the texts never provide simple, monocausal explanations, but rely on a number of different, sometimes contradictory statements. God, humans and nature appear in this conception as actors who interact with each other and share equal responsibility for the catastrophe.
Extreme climate events and famines are among the most continuous problems that humans have had to deal with throughout the ages. At the same time, they are closely intertwined with temporal, spatial and social conditions. Using methods of historical hunger research and the established concept of vulnerability, this study examines the texts of the Hebrew Bible to determine how people perceived, interpreted and coped with extreme climate events. In doing so, it becomes apparent that the texts never provide simple, monocausal explanations, but rely on a number of different, sometimes contradictory statements. God, humans and nature appear in this conception as actors who interact with each other and share equal responsibility for the catastrophe.