Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press and The Past and Present Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Past &Present.
http://www.jstor.org
MORPHOLOGY
SeveralEuropeanlegallevelswereinvolvedin trialsofanimals.They
wereheld beforeroyal,urban,seigneurialand ecclesiasticalcourts.
Nevertheless, theyfollowedonlytwodistinctprocedures,secularand
ecclesiastical.While the formertypewas used to penalizedomestic
beasts that had mortallyinjured a human being, the latterwas
employedto rid the populationof naturalpeststhatcould notindi-
viduallybe punished.The two typeswere clearlydistinctin form
and development,and therefore requireseparatedescription.
In December 1457 thesow of JehanBaillyof Savignyand hersix
pigletswerecaughtin theactofkillingthefive-year-oldJehanMartin.
All seven pigs were imprisonedformurderand broughtto triala
monthlater beforethe seigneurialjustice of Savigny.Besides the
judge, the protocolrecordedthe presenceat the trialof one lawyer
(functionunspecified),twoprosecutors(one of thema lawyerand a
councillorof theduke ofBurgundy),eightwitnessesbyname,"and
severalotherwitnessessummonedand requestedforthis cause".
phy,butactualrecordsofformaltrialshardlyexistbeforethefifteenth
century.As in thecase ofseculartrials,thephenomenonhad a clearly
discerniblegeographicepicentre.All the earlytrialstook place in
Switzerlandand the borderingareas: Savoy,the Dauphine and the
Italian Alps. Subsequentlythe practicespread much fartherthan
secular trialsever did, relyingupon the international networkof
ecclesiasticaljurisdiction.In the followingcenturiesecclesiastical
animaltrialswere held not onlyin France,Germanyand Italy,but
also in Scandinavia,Spain, Canada and Brazil.23
These cases differed in procedureas littleas possiblefromhuman
trials.Thoughconsideredcriminal,theywereinitiatedbyaccusatory
procedure,wherebythe people of the affecteddiocese sued their
naturalscourgesbeforethe episcopal court. Prior to holdingany
proceedings,bishopsusuallyinsisteduponpublicpenitence,almsgiv-
ingand thepaymentofdue tithesas thebestremediesforanynatural
heaven-sentscourge.24Subsequentlythe court,viewinginsensate
creaturesas theequivalentofvulnerableminors,appointedan advo-
cateforthedefence.Thus, whenin 1587thesyndicsofthecommune
ofSaint-Julien-de-Maurienne sued thefliesthatweredestroying their
vineyards, the bishop's official
promptly appointed lawyerat a
a
modestsalary,"lest theanimalsagainstwhomtheactionlies should
remaindefenceless".25
The argumentsbetweenthelawyerson bothsides,dulypresented
in writing,consideredand rebutted,covera wide rangeofissues. In
thisspecificcase theycentredaroundtwo questions:the possibility
ofexcommunication ofanimalsby a humancourt(sincethiswas the
penaltytheplaintiffs requested),and thesurvivalrightsofbothman
and animalin nature.Othercases raisedthe even morebasic issue
of theveryjurisdictionheld by any humanjudge overanimals,but
thispointwas invariablyresolvedin favourofthecourt,whichbeing
ecclesiasticaldrewits authorityfromtheuniversalvalidityof canon
law. The sameargumentansweredalso theproblemofexcommunica-
tion,buttherightto survivalwas moreproblematic. The Saint-Julien
23 For a
thoroughanalysisoftheprocedure,developmentand spreadoftheecclesi-
asticaltrials,see Karl von Amira,"Thierstrafen und Thierprocesse",Mitteilungen des
osterreichischenInstituts xii (1891), pp. 560-72.
furGeschichtsforschung,
24 This was also theprocedurerecommended by theSpanishtheologianAzpilcueta
to the people of Sorrentowho wished to prosecutecertainfishthatinfestedtheir
waters.Martinde Azpilcueta,Consilium No. 52, in his Operaomnia,5 vols. (Cologne,
1616), iii, pp. 282-3.
25 ". . .ne Animalia contraque agiturindeffensaremaneant. .". The entire
protocolof the trialwas publishedby Leon Menabrea,De l'rigine,de la formeet de
l'espritdesjugements renduscontreles animaux(Chambery,1846), appendix.
plaintiffsarguedthatanimalsexistedsolelyfortheutilityofmanand
shouldbe punishediftheyacted contrary to his interests,
whilethe
defencecounteredthatGod had grantedanimalsthe enjoymentof
natureeven beforethe verycreationof man. The latterargument
was unanswerableenough to make the communeofferthe fliesan
alternative in theformofa pieceoflandawayfromthevineyards, but
well-providedwithwaterand vegetation.It shouldbe emphasized,
however,thattherewas no pretenceof a reasonablesettlement with
the insects. Rather, the underlyingidea was that if the verdict
was accepted,the churchcould enforcesuch an arrangement. The
insensatecharacterof the insectswas in no doubt, but the ever-
recurring insistenceupon properprocedureand due justicecreated
an impressionof anthropomorphism. Thus, whentheratsofAutun
failedto appear in court in responseto a formalsummons,their
advocatepleaded his clients'fearof cats as an excuse,demandinga
safe-conductforthe accused. Years laterwhen he was one of the
leadingjuristsofFrance,BartholomeChasseneehad his plea quoted
back to him as a supremeexampleof mostthoroughgoing justice.26
A courtthatsaw itselfas possessingthe God-givenrightto tryall
livingcreatures,human and otherwise,had to grantall of them
justice.
It was thissame conceptofjusticethatallowedfarmoreflexibility
in theverdictofecclesiasticalcourtsthanin secularones. Conviction
in ecclesiasticalanimaltrialswas not a foregoneconclusion.While
the verdictin Saint-Julien is unknowndue to a lacuna in the text,
elsewherethe courtdid accept the advocate'sarguments,assigning
theanimalsa place to live unmolestedand unmolesting.27 Still,the
26 For
thoroughreviewsofthepro and con arguments, see BartholomeChassenee,
Concilium primumde excommunicatione animalium,in his ConciliaD. Bartholomaei a
Chasseneo,Burgundiiurisconsulti (Lyons, 1588), fos. 8'-16v;Gaspar Bailly,Traitede
l'excellencedesmonitoires(Lyons, 1668),repr.in Evans,CriminalProsecution, pp. 287-
306. For modernsummariesofsuchtrials,see vonAmira,"Thierstrafen"; Berkenhoff,
Tierstrafe, pp. 88-102; Evans, CriminalProsecution, pp. 18-135;J. G. Frazer,Folk-
Lorein theOld Testament, 3 vols. (London, 1918),iii, pp. 425-38.The case oftherats
ofAutun,as citedby Augustede Thou, Histoireuniverselle depuis1593jusqu'en1607,
16 vols. (London, 1734), i, bk. 6, pp. 414-16, was broughtback to Chassenee's
attentionby a noblemanof Ariespleadingformercyand justiceforProtestants. For
Chassenee'scontribution to thedevelopmentof Frenchlegalthought,see WilliamF.
Church,Constitutional Thoughtin Sixteenth-Century France:A Studyin theEvolution
ofIdeas (New York, 1969).
27 As in theprocessagainstthebeetlesofChur(n.d., fifteenth century).The source,
FelixMalleolus,"Tractatussecundusde exorcismis",in his Variaeoblationes, opuscula
et tractatus (Basle, 1497), fo. 79, describesthe summonsservedupon the beetles;
aftertheyfailedto appear,theyweregrantedthestatusofminorsand eventually also
the rightto live in peace upon a specifictractof land.
INTERPRETATION
The veryexistenceof animaltrialsin Europe poses severeproblems
forthehistorianofwesternculture.The practicerunscounterto all
commonlyacceptedconceptionsofjustice,humanity and theanimal
kingdom;and yetit survivedand flourished forcenturies.Moreover
theincreasingfrequencyof animaltrialswas contemporaneous with
the so-calledrevivaland acceptanceof Roman law, withthe great
codificationsof criminallaw, and altogether withan ever-increasing
coherenceof rationalsystemsof law and thought.
The basic difficulty lies in the commonoccidentalperceptionof
the relationshipbetweenman and nature.Startingwiththe Bible,
bothJudaismand Christianity have consistently viewedman as the
only creature in God's image and likeness, onlyone possessinga
the
reasonablesoul, aspiringto salvationand destinedforan afterlife.
Withinthe hierarchyof the universe,therefore,man occupies a
specialplace. Atcreationmanwas declaredlordand masterofnature,
and thisidea was ofteninterpreted as a God-givenmandateto utilize
naturefreelyforhumanbenefit.Carriedfurther, the same concept
meantthatthevegetaland animalkingdomexistedsolelyforman's
use. The perceptionof a universalhierarchy withman at thetop of
the mortalcreationwas currentin learnedcirclesthroughoutthe
middle ages and still accepted as an axiom in the early modern
period.29
In thissense,westernculturediffers radicallyfromothersystemsof
thoughtthatperceivemanand animalas existinguponone continuous
plane. The AmericanIndian spokeof "his brotherthebuffalo",the
28
The exactmeansused are somewhatobscure,as different
textsspeakinterchange-
ably of exorcism,excommunication,anathema,adjurationand cursing(maledictio).
Oftentwo or moreof thesetermsare used in thesame text.The formulaeutilizedin
the actual ceremoniesmentionmostoftenanathemaand adjuration.
29
Thomas, Man and theNatural World,pp. 17-41.
THE INDICTMENT
The earliestextantrecordof an animaltrialis theexecutionof a pig
in 1266 at Fontenay-aux-Roses.Roughlyat the same time, early
French customalsbegan mentioningthe practice. Both types of
recordsindicateby theirmatter-of-fact fashionofrecordingthetrials
thatthecustomhad long been in existencebeforetheappearanceof
writtenrecords. Nevertheless,in this case writtenjudicial record
wenthandin handwiththefirstcommentsupon thepractice.Of the
two customalsmentioningthe fact,the Coustumes et stillesde Bour-
goignedoes no morethanprescribetheexecutionof mosthomicidal
animals. The Coutumesde Beauvaisis, however,adds a scathing
criticismto thefacts.Accordingto Philippede Beaumanoir,author
of the Coutumesde Beauvaisis,the onlyjustification forthe custom
layin thecupidityof seigneurialauthorities reluctantto relinquisha
profitablesourceofincome.The practicewas juridically meaningless
and invalid,forall crimepresupposesintent,and beastspossessing
neitherknowledgeof good and evil nor maliciousintentionscould
not be held responsiblefortheiractions.43
Philippe de Beaumanoirwas a secular intellectual,judge and
administrator. Though remarkably learnedin bothRomanand cus-
tomarylaw, his interests werelimitedto thepurelypracticalsphere.
He was notinterested in theoretical
speculationsconcerning theforce
of humanlaw in nature.It is hardlysurprising,therefore, thathe
shouldhavetakenthestandhe did. For a leadingclergyman toadopt
a similarpositionwas moreunusual,as theentireargument foranimal
trialsrestedupon theologicalfoundations.Yet no less an authority
thanThomasAquinasvoiceda strikingly similaropinionconcerning
ecclesiasticaljurisdictionoveranimals.While Beaumanoirbased his
argumenton thelegal conceptof intent,Aquinas centredhis objec-
tionsto theanathematizing ofharmful pestsaroundthephilosophical
idea of reason. Animals,definedas insensateand irrational,could
43 For theexecutionof 1266, see Abbe
JeanLebeuf,Histoiredu diocesede Paris, 15
vols. (Paris, 1755-8),ix, p. 400; C. du Cange, Glossarium mediaeetinfimae Latinitatis,
7 vols. (Paris, 1840-50), iii, s.v. homicida(wherethe quotationis misdated1268);
Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe,p. 26; Evans, CriminalProsecution, p. 140; Agnel,Curiosites
judiciaires,p. 8. For the customsof Burgundy,see above, n. 20. Philippede Beau-
manoir,Coutumes de Beauvaisis,ed. A. Salmon,3 vols. (Paris, 1899-1900,repr.1970),
ii, p. 481, art. 1944. Generallyspeaking,Beaumanoirstandsout amongthecustomal
authorsbyhis organization ofthematerialin judicialcategoriesand hiscommentaries.
consideredtreatisesdealingexclusivelywithanimaltrialsrelevantto
the prosecutionof witches,even if theyneveronce mentionedthe
devil. Evidentlytheconnectionbetweenthetwolayin theprocedure
of exorcism.
Fifteenth-century witch-hunting was more concernedwith the
destructionof guiltypractitioners thanwiththe exorcismof inno-
centlypossessed victims.By the late sixteenthcenturyexorcisms
were becomingmore centralto the prosecutionof witches.74This
factwas reflected notonlyin thelong-lastingpopularity ofMalleolus'
work,butalso in thepublicationofexorcismmanualsthatshedlight
bothon thepracticeand upon its applicationto animals.In thefirst
place, they show almost exactlythe same phrasingof exorcism
formulaefordevilsand animals.75Bothadjuredtheirsubjectin the
name of God, the Trinityor the saintsto departfromtheirarea of
operations(humanbody,vineyardor lake) and to cause humansno
furtherharm. While the animal exorcismsrarelyassumedany de-
monicagencyto be atwork,theydid evincethesameanthropocentric
and utilitarianapproachvoicedbyFrenchjurists.Thus, theexorcism
recordedby Maximiliand'Eynatten,an early seventeenth-century
canon fromAntwerp,adjuredtheanimalsto depart"to such places
. . . whereyou shall be unable to harmany of God's servants".If
theywere the devil's emissaries,theywereadjuredto self-destruct,
so thatnonewould remain"exceptforthosewho bringaboutGod's
gloryand are of use and salvationto humanity".Anotherexorcism
by the same author, applied to animals suffering fromdemonic
possession,forbidsthe devil access to a certainplace "in detriment
. . of all thingsgrantedby God forthe use of humanbeings".76
74 See RobertMandrou,Magistrats etsorciersenFranceau XVIIe siecle(Paris, 1980),
pp. 163-79,251-60.
75 "I
adjure you, beetles,who dissipateand destroythefoodof menin thisplace,
thatyou shoulddeparthenceforth and go whereyoucan harmnobody"("Adiurovos,
limaces .. .alimenta hominumdissipantiaet corrodentiahoc in territoria . . . ut a
dicto territorio . . . dissedatis,et ad loca, in quibus nullisnocerepossitis,accedatis
. ."): Chassenee,Concilium, fo. 17v;"I conjureyou,horribleand abominablespirits
who unceasinglyoccupy and disturbthis creatureof God, N., in the name of the
Father,the Son, and the Holy Ghost,to departimmediately and fleethisbody and
divinematter"("Coniuro vos superscriptos neffandissimos et abominabilesspiritus
qui hanccreaturamDei N. occupareet molestare. .. noncessatis,perpatrem,filium,
et spiritumsanctum. . . ut statimexeatiset fugiatisde vase isto et plasmateDei
. ."): HyeronimusMengus, Flagellumdaemonum, in Thesaurusexorcismorum atque
coniurationum terribilium (Cologne, 1626), p. 299.
76 "Talia loca . . ubi nullis Dei servisnocerepoteritis","nisi ad gloriamDei et
ad usum et salutemhumanumconducibiles","in detrimentum . . quarumcumque
rerumhumaniutilitatia Deo indultarum":Maximiliand'Eynatten,Manualeexorcism-
orum,in Thesaurus,pp. 1201, 1190.
CONCLUSION
82 pp. 331-5.
Mengus, Flagellumdaemonum,