Paper short abstract:

This proposal examines the manipulation of snakes for ritual and religious ends, namely a “tradition” that some groups consider “good to think”, as well as “necessary” for the survival and moral identification of the group itself.

Paper long abstract:

Every anthropologist involved in the field of “heritage” has understood how many points of friction exist between local traditions (a form of “local law”) and the laws emanated by the state and supra-national organizations. This proposal examines the killing and manipulation of snakes for ritual and religious ends, namely a “tradition” that some groups consider “good to think”, as well as “necessary” for the survival and moral identification of the group itself. In this case, the frictions between local traditions, human rights, and the obligation to safeguard the environment that originate with international heritage (i.e. cultural assets of collective interest) conventions are macroscopic. At the same time, from a cultural point of view, biodiversity also has its reasons: there are groups whose traditions help safeguard their natural environment, although from the outside it may seem quite the opposite. In short, anthropologists are engaged in complex mediation actions between “universal rights” and “local rights” based on a profound knowledge of settings. The proposal suggests practicing this mediation through a transversal perspective. Indeed, “tradition” is not radically opposed to “innovation”, but acts as a dynamic and endlessly restructuring force.