Animals on Trial (part 2)
The Dog Staring at Me in the Restaurant - Animal Welfare and Animal Rights
Last time I wrote about animal trials. Between the mid 1300s and the mid 1700s animals were routinely put on trial in Europe for crimes including murder, and property damage. Over the centuries the trials disappeared with the last recorded trail occurred in Macedonia in 2008.
Rabbit Hole
As a side note, animals weren’t the only ones put on trial. The Greeks were known to put inanimate objects like rock or wood on trial. If the object was involved in a murder, for instance a house collapsed killing someone inside, the offending objects, be it a piece of wall or ceiling or a wood beam, would stand trial for murder.
“If a lifeless thing shall deprive a person of life, provided it may not be a thunderbolt or other missile hurled by a god, but an object which the person may have run against or by which he may have been struck and slain,… the culprit shall be put beyond the boundaries, in the same manner as if it were an animal.” Plato.
I like the fact that they made exceptions for gods.
This practice of putting inanimate objects on trial seems to have been a mainly Greek thing and mostly stopped around the time the Romans conquered the Greek city states.
There are examples of inanimate things being blamed for things in more recent times. For instance in Scotland, if a sailor drowned then his boat was beached, not to be used again. The son of Ivan IV of Russia was assassinated and a bell in a church was rung in the town to give signal to insurrectionists. The bell was excommunicated by the church and sent to Siberia. The bell was eventually reconsecrated and fully pardoned three hundred and one years later. But in these cases and all other more modern instances, the inanimate object was not put on trial, merely punished.
End Rabbit Hole
If you travel to Europe now, you’ll find many places open to dogs, including restaurants and cafes. While dogs aren’t allowed everywhere (most notably churches and some grocery stores), European countries are generally open to people bringing their animals with them. Austria has some of the most strict animal welfare laws in the world. This got me wondering if the animal trials and associated executions were directly linked to the rise of the animal welfare and animal rights movements.
So what was the purpose of putting animals on trial in the Middle Ages? Was there an expectation it would deter other animals from committing crime?
Late medieval Europe was a place of great unrest. Although the Renaissance would begin around the start of the 15th century, Europe was filled with superstition and unrest. There was nearly continuous war, particularly in the areas that would become France, Italy, Germany and Spain. The black death arrived in 1348 and killed over a third of the population in the next five years, making reappearances throughout the next five centuries (although never as devastating), famines, floods, the little ice age of the 15th to 17thcenturies all lead to societal instability and insecurity. Between 1300 and 1700, in the four countries listed above there were at least two dozen peasant revolts.
Much of Europe during this time consisted not of the countries we know now, but of city states and duchies. There were kings, certainly, but their power was as much based on military might as by fealty of other lords. Peasants had a fealty to their own lord but not necessarily to the king and for the most part high politics was ignored by the poor and working classes, who just wanted to get on with their lives.
The institution with the greatest influence during this period was the Catholic clergy, until the reformation, who promised heaven for the good and hell for the bad.
Amongst this seemingly unending strife, secular and non secular authorities wanted to do something to show they were in control and taking care of the people. Animal trials achieved that, in part.
The trials showed that someone was in charge, that there were laws to be followed and there were consequences for not following those laws. By punishing animals examples could be provided which did not punish the peasants directly. It was also a way for the church to gain revenue.
Economist Peter Leeson mapped out the known ecclesiastical animal trials and showed a correlation between areas where tithe revenue was low and the number of animal trials. Low revenue from tithes seems to have sparked more animal trials to bolster people’s belief in the penalty for evading church laws.
Rabbit Hole
This same period also showed a marked increase in witch trials. Witch trials started increasing, followed shortly afterwards by “vermin” trials”, both declining around the same time. In case you’re wondering, (as I was), witch trials were initially ecclesiastical, administered by the church, but by the mid 16th century were almost entirely civil as state power increased, often at the expense of the church.
End Rabbit Hole
The trials of animals decreased over time. One reason suggested is that it sparked uncomfortable questions. If an animal is put on trial for murder and is offered all the same rights and benefits as a human on trial for the same crime, then what other rights does the animal have? Do they have all the same rights as people?
Starting in the early 17th century, animal welfare was becoming more prominent, and animals were seen less as unfeeling beasts and more as creatures to be protected (despite Rene Descartes proclaiming that animals were simply “machines”).
The first animal welfare legislation was passed in 1635 in Ireland, but it wasn’t until 1876 that the first national legislation was passed with the British Cruelty to Animal Act. Black Beauty, published in 1877, spurred the movement towards the welfare of horses specifically, and activism became more prominent among animal welfare supporters. For a fascinating account of this type of action read about The Brown Dog Affair, as response to dog vivisection in England at the turn of the 20th century.
I won’t get into animal welfare vs animal rights and their various positions, nor their history except to say animal welfare started much earlier and the animal rights movement didn’t really start until the mid 1960s.
To answer the question I posed near the beginning of the article; did animal trials and their associated executions give rise to welfare and rights? Surprisingly to me, the answer appears to be no. It seems that the animal welfare movement had less to do with animals being executed and more to do with the Enlightenment.
Up until the middle 17th century animals were regarded as distinct from humans. Human were rational, animals weren’t. Animals only had value as instruments for humanity’s use. During the Enlightenment that position started to change. The idea that animals may be somewhat rational, and that they clearly felt pain meant they had intrinsic value, value in their own right. This created the foundation for the animal welfare and later animal rights movements.
One of my happy moments when traveling comes from watching locals interacting and being with their pets. I have no problem eating in a restaurant where someone has a dog with them, I only marvel at how well behaved their dog is compared to mine, who would no doubt be spending their time conning people out of their meals by using their soulful puppy dog eyes.
Evans, E.P. The Criminal Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals, 1906
Hyde, Walter W. The Prosecution of Animals and Lifeless things in the Middle Ages and Modern Times. 1916
Phillips, Patrick J.J. Medieval Animal Trials: Justice for All. 2013
Lesson, Peter, Journal of Criminal and Social Justice, 2020