• Author / Uploaded
• Perla Valero

• Categories
• Folklore
• Justicia
• Crimen y justicia

Citation preview

The Past and Present Society

Law, Folklore and Animal Lore Author(s): Esther Cohen Source: Past & Present, No. 110 (Feb., 1986), pp. 6-37 Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/650647 . Accessed: 05/10/2014 13:02 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 [email protected].

.

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

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE AND ANIMAL LORE* In the Middle Ages . . . law was the pointwherelifeand logic met.1 ... it is impossibleto disentanglewhatthepeopleofthepastthoughtaboutplants and animalsfromwhattheythoughtabout themselves.2

LEGAL PRACTICE AS A CULTURAL MANIFESTATION

The practiceof law among westernEuropean people in the later middleages and the earlymodernperiodhas long been the subject scholarshave concentrated ofresearch.Traditionally theirenquiries directions:the historyof learnedjurisprumainlyin two different dence and theinstitutional developmentsresultingfromthegrowth ofroyallegislation.3 Anthropologists enquiringintothelegalarrangementsofothersocietieshave posed different questions.Whilemany oftheirconclusionsare based on specificcase studies,in theattempt and comparative tools to evolvecertaincross-cultural methodological theyhave consideredseveral problemsof universalvalidity,and be applied to the the resultantconclusionscould, mutatismutandis, evolutionof European legal practicein thepast.4 In the firstplace, they have attemptedto reach a universally * An earlierversionof this paper was deliveredat the Annual Conferenceof the AssociationforMedievaland RenaissanceStudiesofIsrael(June1983). I am grateful to ProfessorYaakov Blidstein,Dr. Eli Yassifand Mr. David Cohen fortheirsuggestions,and to ProfessorMiriam Yardeni and Dr. Amnon Linder forreadingand commenting upon an earlierdraftof thispaper. 1 F. W. Maitland,Collected Papers,ed. H. A. L. Fisher,3 vols. (Cambridge,1911), iii,p. xxxvii. 2 Keith Thomas, Man and theNaturalWorld(New York, 1983), p. 16. 3 For the intellectual historyof medieval law, see among othersthe works of HermannKantorowiczand WalterUllmann;mostoftheworkon law and governance has been done in thecontextof Englishcommonlaw. See, forexample,BryceLyon, and LegalHistoryofMedievalEngland(New York, 1960). For France, A Constitutional au moyen see FerdinandLot and RobertFawtier,Histoiredesinstitutions francaises age, 3 vols. (Paris, 1957-62),ii, pp. 289-506. 4 For a summaryand a reviewof the different trendsin legal anthropology, past and present,see SallyF. Moore,Law as Process:AnAnthropological (London, Approach withinthehistorical 1978), pp. 214-56. For a recentapplicationoflegalanthropology contextof civillitigation,see theessaysin JohnBossy(ed.), Disputesand Settlements: Law and HumanRelationsin theWest(Cambridge,1983).

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

7

oflaw.5This was a necessarystepin theprocess definition functional law fromcustom,a problemthathas also occupied ofdistinguishing historiansof European law. One such distinctionis that custom embodied social norms,while law had to pass througha process beforereachingcoercive,posited of "double institutionalization" bestatus.6While legal historianshave alwaysclearlydistinguished tweencustomand law, theiremphasiswas usuallyon originrather thanon institutionalization. Societymaycreatecustom,butlegislation was the ruler'sprovince.7 This dichotomyoflaw and customis problematic in thecontextof actual continentalmedieval justice.8Side by side with legislation therewas a continuousdynamicprocessof legal practice.Though thestudyofcourtrecordsindependently fromlaw-codesand jurisprudentialliteratureis stillin its earlystages,one factis beginningto dictatedby emerge.The practiceofmedievallaw was notnecessarily its prescriptions.This phenomenonhas been observed in other who concludedthatan absolute societiesby some anthropologists and between or betweenthe social structure", ideology "congruence theoretical formoflaw envisagedby legislatorsand therealityofthe court-housewas a myth.9In factno medievalrulerpossessed an 5 This attempthas produced a wide varietyof definitions, rangingfromMalinowski's,emphasizingtherole of mutualsocial obligations,to Bohannan's,stressing theauthoritarian and coercivecharacterof law: B. Malinowski,Crimeand Customin Savage Society(London, 1926); Paul Bohannan,"The DifferingRealms of Law", lxvii(1965, specialissue), pp. 33-42. PerhapsthemostencomAmer.Anthropologist, is theone proposedby Leopold Pospisil,whosaw law as possessing passingdefinition fournecessaryattributes: intention ofuniversalapplication,[mutual]obligaauthority, tionand sanction:L. Pospisil,Kapauku Papuans and theirLaw (New Haven, 1958), of Law: A ComparativeTheory(New York, pp. 257-72; L. Pospisil, Anthropology bearsa startling resemblanceto theone propounded 1971),pp. 39-96.This definition by Thomas Aquinas: "an ordinanceof reason,forthe commongood, made by him who has the care of the community,and promulgated":Summatheologiae (Rome, 1886), 1stpt. of the 2nd pt., q. 90, art. 3. 6 The termis Bohannan's: "The DifferingRealms of Law", pp. 34-7; but most modernauthorities,in a reactionto Malinowski'sapproach,have insistedupon the coercivecharacterof law. For a present-day assessmentofMalinowski's institutional, importance,see IrvingL. Horowitz,"Crime, Customand Culture:Remarkson the FunctionalistTheoryof BronislawMalinowski",Internat. Sociol., iii Jl. Comparative (1962), pp. 229-44. 7 This opinion has prevailedin westernculturefromthe Bible and Aristotleto Thomas Hobbes. 8 I have deliberately excludedfromthe discussionthedevelopmentof the system of Englishcommonlaw, whichis an entirelydifferent process. 9 See Moore, Law as Process,p. 69, discussing Chagga society:"... although of applicationis oftenused as one ofthebasic elementsin anydefinition universality oflaw, universality is oftena myth.Most rulesoflaw . . . affect onlya limitedcategory ofpersonsin a limitednumberofsituations".For theanalysisofthetensionbetween ideologyand social structure,see ibid., pp. 33-42.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

8

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

absolutepower to enforcelegislationin everycourtof the realm. Moreoverthe existenceof inviolabletraditionscircumscribedthe veryabilityto legislate.A rulercould attempteitherto enforceor to ignorethem,but he was almostneverable legallyto abrogatethe existentbody of usage. Those traditions,incorporatedinto medievalcustomarycodes, held a positionpeculiarto European society.Unlike manyhuman medievalEuropewas not groupingsstudiedbylegalanthropologists, an illiteratesociety.It was composedof a smallbut ever-increasing literateelementand a largebut decreasingilliteratesegment.For a longtimetheprivilegeofstatingthelaw in practicaltermswas within theprovinceofa largelynon-literate element.10The forceofcustom intothewritten was suchthatitwas eventually tradition, incorporated oftenachievingby theend ofthemiddleages thefullforceofposited law. At thatpointthe distinctionbetweenlaw and custombecame formalratherthan functional,even the most ardentsupportersof thelegalvalidityofcustom." Romanand monarchiclaw recognizing and ofthelaw, anthropolothe definition circumscription Beyond have insisted each uponexamining gists usually legalsystemwithinits In socio-cultural context.12 different societies legalprocesses specific could servenot onlyto preserveorderand justice,but also to settle scores, safeguardhierarchicalstructures, providea settingforthe of and societal consolidation values,legalor otherwise,and a testing for ritual drama that reinforced While stage society'sself-image.13 theexactoriginsofEuropeanlegalcustomsarestillan openquestion, thereis no doubtthattheywerefirmly anchoredin specificcultural and social contextsand fulfilled certainsocietallyspecificfunctions in consequence. These customsand theirpracticalapplicationin 10In France thisprivilegewas maintaineduntilthe end of themiddleages in the formof the enquetepar turbe,whichdeterminedthe exactlocal customof any given of theevidenceofat leasttenturbiers. See H. Pissard,Essai sur place on the strength et la preuvedes coutumes la connaissance (Paris, 1910), pp. 98-112. 11 WalterUllmann, The MedievalIdea of Law as Represented byLucas de Penna (London, 1946), pp. 62-70; WalterUllmann,"Bartoluson CustomaryLaw", in D. Studi e documenti (Milan, Segoloni(ed.), Bartoloda Sassoferrato: per il VI centenario in theMiddleAges(London, 1980). 1961), pp. 49-73, repr. in his Jurisprudence 12 "We musthave a look at societyand cultureat largein orderto findtheplace of law withinthe total structure":E. Adamson Hoebel, The Law of PrimitiveMan (Cambridge,Mass., 1954), p. 5. See also Laura Nader (ed.), Law in Cultureand Society(Chicago, 1969), pp. 8-9. 13 Laura Nader, "The Anthropological Ixvii Studyof Law", Amer.Anthropologist, (1965, special issue), pp. 19-20. For an analysisof a medievalexecutionalong those Castile", lines, see Angus MacKay, "Ritual and Propagandain Fifteenth-Century Past and Present,no. 107 (May 1985), pp. 3-43.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

9

be understoodas emanationsand manifestations courtmusttherefore theirfunctions cannot ofcertainculturalenvironments. Furthermore, be explainedexclusivelyin termsof peace-keepingor disputesettlement.Medieval societycould use its courtsfora multitudeof purposes, manyof thembeyondthe purelylegal sphere. The conceptof culturehas been so widelyand indiscriminately itsmeaningwithintheterms used thatitis necessaryto circumscribe of thispaper. While legal processesmay have sprungfromcertain thatformpartofthegeneralexpression beliefs,ritualsand perceptions of spiritcommonlytermedculture,those processesin themselves notonlyin so faras they consistequallyof a culturalmanifestation, but also because they stem froma specificculturalenvironment, contributeto the formationof the same environment.As a rule historianshave posited a dichotomybetweenlearnedand popular elementsofculture.14 It is impossibleto applythisdistinction to the realmofEuropeanlaw. Like otherliteratesocieties,Europepossessed oflegallevels,bothin therealmsoftheory a remarkablemultiplicity and of practice.15Learned Roman glosses,royallegislation,canon law, customalsand urban statutesexistedside by side, each one createdand affectedby a different social group and expressinga different facetofcontemporary culture,butconstantly interpenetratand each other.16 Bothciviland criminaljusticewere ing influencing administeredby royal,feudal,seigneurial,urban and ecclesiastical courts.Judicialculture,therefore, was hardlya monolithic manifestaof the Bologna professor,the town tion. It containedthe consilium magistrate'ssentenceand the peasant's evidence. It could not be classifiedas eitherpopularor learned,itsveryscope makingpossible of thosewidelydivergentelements. the incorporation This considerablecomplexity is hardlyamenabletoanygeneralized typology.In one realm,however,the historianhas the advantage over the anthropologist: he or she can followthe evolutionof legal practiceover a long period of time. The "processualcharacterof to historians. law", as Moore calls it,17has long been self-evident Law is made and re-madethroughconstantpractice,and any static descriptionof a dynamicphenomenonmust necessarilybe faulty. 14 deselites(Paris, See, forexample,RobertMuchembled,Culture populaireetculture 1978). 15 Pospisil,Anthropology ofLaw, pp. 97-126. 16 Crimein the Renaissance: See, for example, John H. Langbein, Prosecuting France(Cambridge,Mass., 1974), tracingthedevelopmentofthe England,Germany, inquisitorialprocedurein canon and civil law. 17 Moore, Law as Process,pp. 42-8.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

10

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

Giventheexistentknowledgeofpastlegaland institutional developmentsand of the evolvingrelationshipbetweenelite and popular culturalexpressions,it is possibleto attempta long-term interpretation. One such practice,the criminalprosecutionand executionof animals, may illustratethe interactionof variouslegal levels and culturalinfluences.These trials,documentedin Europeanlegalhisto theeighteenth century,occupyan intertoryfromthethirteenth mediatepositionbetweenpopularand elitelegalculture.On theone not judicial folklore:the sentenceswere hand, theywere definitely and executed in passed properlyconstitutedcourtsof law by fully accordingto generallyacceptedlaws. On the qualifiedmagistrates, otherhand, thereis no questionthattheywere an integralpartof law and owedtheircontinuedexistencepartially topopular customary illustrates thecontinualintertraditions and influences.Theirhistory actionbetweenpopularand learnedelementsin the sphereof legal serve practice.At thesame time,theirvariousstagesofdevelopment as evidenceof theprocessualand dynamiccharacterofwesternlaw. Following the phenomenonthroughthe warp and woof of legal and fromcustomalsto the history,fromcourt-houseto university gallowsacrosscenturiesof changingperceptionsof nature,law and ofcontinental justice,one mightattemptan interpretation European law as practisedwithinits specificculturalcontext. 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 notindividuallybe punished.The two typeswere clearlydistinctin form and development,and therefore requireseparatedescription. In December 1457 thesow of JehanBaillyof Savignyand hersix JehanMartin. pigletswerecaughtin theactofkillingthefive-year-old 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".

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE AND ANIMAL LORE

11

Though the ownerwas formallythe defendant,it is clear fromthe proceedingsthathe stoodaccused onlyof negligenceand was in no dangerof any personalpunishment.Moreoverhe was allowed to arguein court"concerningthe punishmentand just executionthat should be inflictedupon the said sow", ifhe could give any reason whythesow shouldbe spared.The ownerhavingwaivedthisright, theprosecutorrequesteda deathsentence.The judge,havingheard all therelevanttestimony and consultedwithwisemenknowledgeable in local law, ruled, accordingto the customof Burgundy,thatthe sow should be forfeitto the justiceof Savignyforthe purpose of hangingby her hind legs on a suitabletree.The pigletscreateda moredifficult problemas therewas no proofthattheyhad actually bittenthe child, thoughtheywere foundbloodstained.They were therefore remandedto thecustodyoftheirowner,who was required tovouchfortheirfuturebehaviourand producethemfortrial,should new evidencecome to light.When thelatterrefusedto give such a to thelocal lord'sjustice, guarantee,thepigletsweredeclaredforfeit no suffered further punishment.The court brought thoughthey fromChalon-sur-Saonea professional hangmanwho carriedout the executionaccordingto the judge's specificinstructions.18 The case ofthesow of Savignyis typicalin manyrespectsofmost secularanimaltrials.In thefirstplace, it was held in Burgundy,one of the earliestareas to recordsuch cases. Animal trialswere first mentionedduringthe thirteenth centuryin northernand eastern whence to the Low Countries,to Germanyand France, theyspread to Italy.The defendant'sporcinenaturealso recurredin a greatmany trials. Pigs, who seem to have accountedforthe deaths of many unattendedinfants,were the most commonculprits,but thereare also recordsof homicidaloxen, cows, horsesand dogs. Most of all, the trialis typicalin its painstakinginsistenceupon theobservance of legal customand properjudicial procedure.This was neithera vindictive ofa dangerousbeast.Other lynchingnortheextermination recordsmention,in additionto pre-trial thegranting imprisonment, of remissionsto wronglyaccused beasts,the burningin effigy of a "contumacious"animal,and thepublicdisplayofan executedcow's 18 The fulltextof the trialhas been publishedby J. Berriat-Saint-Prix, "Rapport et recherchessurles proceset jugementsrelatifsaux animaux",Memoires de la Societe royaledes antiquairesde France, viii (1829), pp. 441-5; by Edward P. Evans, The and Capital Punishment CriminalProsecution ofAnimals(London, 1906), pp. 346-53; and by Hans A. Berkenhoff, und rechtsrituelle im Tierstrafe, Tierbannung Tiertotung Mittelalter (Strasbourg,1937), pp. 120-3.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

12

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

head.19While the upside-downhangingof animalswas peculiarto Burgundian custom,20 elsewhere differenttypes of execution pre-

vailed. Some of themcloselyparalleledthehumanprecedentwhile othersprescribeda peculiarly"animal" formofdeath.Thus in some while places animalsweredraggedand hunglikehumanmurderers, in othersthe authoritiesresortedto stranglingor a knock on the head.21The use of a treeinsteadof the "human" gallowswas also occasionallyapparent,thougheventhena properhangmanperformed thejob. Wherethehangman'sbillsare extant,theycloselyresemble thosepresentedforthe executionof humans.22 The historyofecclesiasticaltrialsis less clear-cut.The motifofthe thedominionofGod's law overnatureby holyman who exemplifies obnoxious recursthroughout creatures medievalhagiogracursing 19For imprisonment ofa sow in Meulan (1403), ofpigsin Laon (1494) and MoyenMoutier(1572), and of a dog in Leyden(1595), see Evans, CriminalProsecution, pp. 338, 355; Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 124, 129. For a remissiongrantedbyDuke Philip of Burgundyto pigs in Saint-Marcel-les-Jussey (1379), see Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, p. 119. For burningin effigy,see Registrecriminelde la justicede Saint-Martin-desChamps,ed. Louis Tanon (Paris, 1877), pp. 227-8.A frescoon thewall ofthechurch of Sainte-Trinite in Falaise, now paintedover, depictedthe executionof a sow in humanclothing;theexecutiondid indeed takeplace in 1386, but as it antedatedthe frescoby some fiftyyears, the picturecannot be taken as evidence: Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 16, 118. For a displayof a cow's head in Ghent(1578), see ibid., pp. 30-1. This anthropomorphic attitudewas expressedalso in the language of the sentences:one statedthata pig had "committedand perpetrated. . . murderand homicide": ibid., p. 120; anotherpig had "killed and murdered"a child: Evans, CriminalProsecution, p. 336. A thirdhad shown"crueltyand ferocity"by killinga humanbeing: ibid., p. 357. 20 Coustumes et stillesde Bourgoigne (1270-1360),art. 197: "L'on dit et tientselon droitet la coustumede Bourgoigneque se un boeufou un cheuaufaitun ou pluseurs homicidesil nan doiuentpoinctmorir,ne Ion nendoitfairejustice,feurquilz doiuent estrepris par le seigneuren qui justiceilz on faitle delitou par ses gens,et lui sont du dit seigneur;mes se confisquezet doiuentestrevendus et exploictiezau prouffit autresbestesou juyfle font,ilz doiuentestrependus par les piez derreniers"("It is statedaccordingto the law and customof Burgundythatifan ox or a horsecommit one or morehomicides,theyshouldnot die, norshould theybe triedand executed. Rather, they should be impounded by the lord in whose jurisdictionthey had committedthe crime,or by his men, to be confiscatedand sold forthe said lord's profit.But ifanotheranimalor a Jewdo it, theyshouldbe hungby theirrearlegs"): du droitfrancais au moyendge,2 vols. (Paris, quoted by C. Giraud,Essai surI'histoire 1846), ii, p. 302. While thistypeof executionwas applied to Jewsall over Europe, its use foranimalsis peculiarto Burgundy. 21 For "non-human"typesof execution,see Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 24-40. 22 For billspresentedupontheexecutionofanimals,see Evans,Criminal Prosecution, and feescloselyresemTierstrafe, pp. 118-19.The itemization pp. 336-9; Berkenhoff, bled thoseappearingin billsforhumanexecutions.Cf. CharlesDesmaze, Lespenalites anciennes:Supplices,prisonset griceen Franced'apresdes textesinedits(Paris, 1866), pp. 91-2; BibliothequeNationale,Paris, MS. fr. 7645, "Peines et supplicesde la siecles". justicecriminelleen France au cinq derniers

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

13

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 networkof secular trialsever did, relyingupon the international ecclesiasticaljurisdiction.In the followingcenturiesecclesiastical animaltrialswere held not onlyin France,Germanyand Italy,but also in Scandinavia,Spain, Canada and Brazil.23 in procedureas littleas possiblefromhuman These cases differed trials.Thoughconsideredcriminal,theywereinitiatedbyaccusatory procedure,wherebythe people of the affecteddiocese sued their naturalscourgesbeforethe episcopal court. Prior to holdingany proceedings,bishopsusuallyinsisteduponpublicpenitence,almsgivingand thepaymentofdue tithesas thebestremediesforanynatural heaven-sentscourge.24Subsequentlythe court,viewinginsensate creaturesas theequivalentofvulnerableminors,appointedan advocateforthedefence.Thus, whenin 1587thesyndicsofthecommune ofSaint-Julien-de-Maurienne sued thefliesthatweredestroying their official the a bishop's promptly vineyards, appointed lawyerat 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 requested),and thesurvivalrightsofbothman penaltytheplaintiffs and animalin nature.Othercases raisedthe even morebasic issue of theveryjurisdictionheld by any humanjudge overanimals,but thispointwas invariablyresolvedin favourofthecourt,whichbeing fromtheuniversalvalidityof canon ecclesiasticaldrewits authority law. The sameargumentansweredalso theproblemofexcommunicaThe Saint-Julien tion,buttherightto survivalwas moreproblematic. 23 For a thoroughanalysisoftheprocedure,developmentand spreadoftheecclesiund Thierprocesse",Mitteilungen des asticaltrials,see Karl von Amira,"Thierstrafen Instituts xii (1891), pp. 560-72. osterreichischen 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 renduscontreles animaux(Chambery,1846), appendix. l'espritdesjugements

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

14

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

plaintiffs arguedthatanimalsexistedsolelyfortheutilityofmanand 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, with however,thattherewas no pretenceof a reasonablesettlement 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 everinsistenceupon properprocedureand due justicecreated recurring 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 is unknowndue to a lacuna in the text, the verdictin Saint-Julien elsewherethe courtdid accept the advocate'sarguments,assigning theanimalsa place to live unmolestedand unmolesting.27 Still,the 26 For see BartholomeChassenee, thoroughreviewsofthepro and con arguments, a Concilium animalium,in his ConciliaD. Bartholomaei primumde excommunicatione Chasseneo,Burgundiiurisconsulti (Lyons, 1588), fos. 8'-16v;Gaspar Bailly,Traitede l'excellence desmonitoires (Lyons, 1668),repr.in Evans,CriminalProsecution, pp. 287306. For modernsummariesofsuchtrials,see vonAmira,"Thierstrafen"; Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 88-102; Evans, CriminalProsecution, pp. 18-135;J. G. Frazer,FolkLorein 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 For attentionby a noblemanof Ariespleadingformercyand justiceforProtestants. to thedevelopmentof Frenchlegalthought,see WilliamF. Chassenee'scontribution France:A Studyin theEvolution Church,Constitutional Thoughtin Sixteenth-Century 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; also aftertheyfailedto appear,theyweregrantedthestatusofminorsand eventually the rightto live in peace upon a specifictractof land.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE AND ANIMAL LORE

15

and the churchthenexpelledthe case usuallywentto the plaintiffs of exorcism or excommunication.28 The means noxiousanimalsby in out the solemn ritual of a sentenceswerecarried publicprocession in the presenceof all local clergyand people. Though both typesof trialswere commonin the earlymodern ad quemforeither period, it is impossibleto set a clear terminus the became eighteenthcenturythey practice.During increasingly rare and informal,oftentakingthe formof villagejustice.A legal practicethathad survivedforhalfa millenniumdied out. INTERPRETATION

The veryexistenceof animaltrialsin Europe poses severeproblems forthehistorianofwesternculture.The practicerunscounterto all and theanimal commonlyacceptedconceptionsofjustice,humanity forcenturies.Moreover kingdom;and yetit survivedand flourished theincreasingfrequencyof animaltrialswas contemporaneous with the so-calledrevivaland acceptanceof Roman law, withthe great codifications of 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 creature in and God's the likeness, onlyone possessinga only image 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 textsspeakinterchangeanathema,adjurationand cursing(maledictio). ably of exorcism,excommunication, Oftentwo or moreof thesetermsare used in thesame text.The formulaeutilizedin the actual ceremoniesmentionmostoftenanathemaand adjuration. 29 Thomas, Man and theNatural World,pp. 17-41.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

16

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

Mexican Indian perceivedanimalsas individualsoul-matesof each humanand theBuddhistsawtransmigration ofsoulsbetweenhumans and animalsas inevitable,30 but Europeanthinkersdid theirbestto markan impassableboundarybetweenman and beast. Perhapsthe mostextremeexpressionof thisapproachwas Descartes'sidea, that animalsare automatapossessingneithersense nor feelings.Within thisframework it was inconceivablethata beastshouldbe placed in a human situationand treatedas a human being. Animal trials, however,did exactlythat. Most nineteenth-century scholarswho grappledwiththeproblem solved it in termsof culturalpositivism.Animaltrialswere clearly thelegacyofa primitive, superstitious past. This approachprovided twospecificexplanations.The mostsimplistic viewedthetrialsas the communalhistoricalequivalentof a child's tempertantrum:"This childishdispositionto punishirrationalcreatures. . . is commonto theinfancyof individualsand races". The otherexplanationplaced thephenomenonwithina "primitive"culturalcontextthatattributed or demonicqualitiesto insensatebeasts.31 eitheranthropomorphic Neitherexplanationmadeanyattempttoprovidedistinctinterpretationsfor the two different types of trials,and neitherfitsthe can hardlybe used to describe facts.The idea of childishretaliation sentencespassed (sometimesafterponderousdebatesand trialsyears or legalopinionsofleading long)by episcopalcourtsandparlements, The cultural law faculties.32 and jurists explanationshave themerit of placing the phenomenonwithinits historicalcontext,but their of two different proceduresmakesnonsenseof simplisticconflation 30 J. E. Brown (ed.), TheSacredPipe (Norman, 1953); FrankG. Speck,Naskapi: The Savage Huntersof theLabradorPeninsula(Norman, 1935); Gary H. Gossen, "Animal Souls and Human Destinyin Chamula", Man, x (1975), pp. 448-61; fora ofthisconceptin legal terms,see J. J. Finkelstein,TheOx thatGored clearstatement (Philadelphia,1981), pp. 52-4. 31 Evans, Criminal Prosecution, interpretations p. 186. The positivist belonglargely Frenchantiquarian-savants: to theschoolofnineteenth-century J. Berriat-Saint-Prix, i (1819), dujurisconsulte, "Des procesintentesaux animaux", Themis,ou bibliotheque "Rapportet rechpp. 194-7,and ibid., viiiB (1826), pp. 61 ff.;Berriat-Saint-Prix, de laformeetde l'esprit;CharlesLouandre,"L'epopee erches";Menabrea,De l'origine, des animaux", Revue des deux mondes,xxv (1854), pp. 331-5; E. Agnel, Curiosites lesanimaux(Paris, 1858); A. Sorel, du moyenage: Procescontre judiciairesethistoriques "Proces contreles animauxet insectessuivis au moyenage dans la Picardieet le de Compiegne, iii (1876-7), pp. 269-314. Valois", Bulletinde la Societehistorique 32 In 1609 theparlement ofPariscondemneda cow to death,and a similarsentence of Aix-en-Provence was passed in 1679 by theparlement againsta mare: Louandre, "Rapportet recherches",p. 431; in 1621the "L'epopee", p. 334; Berriat-Saint-Prix, Leipzig law facultygave an opinionon the mode of executionof a cow in Machern: Evans, CriminalProsecution, pp. 169-70;Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 31-2.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE AND ANIMAL LORE

17

the interpretation. Endowing animalswith human characteristics, or malicious such as reason intent,can explainsecularproceedings one could justifyecclesiasticaltrialsin againstthem. Conversely, devilsrather thosetermsonlyifindeedtheyconcernedtheriomorphic to the animals.By failing distinguish twotypes, thanflesh-and-blood were guiltyof confusingtwo distincttradihistorians the positivist their final and tions, explanationfailsto covereitherphenomenon.33 come up againstone mainstumblingAll positivistinterpretations block:thesequenceofevents.All sourcesclearlyindicatethatanimal trials,bothsecularand ecclesiastical,becamecommonpracticein the later middle ages, reachingtheirpeak of frequencyand greatest sixteenthand seventeenth geographicscope during the fifteenth, to centuriesand subsequentlydeclining.Those factswere difficult in linear with the of progression square picture humanityadvancing fromthesuperstitious middleages to therationalnineteenth century. Indeed, one scholar commentedin a puzzled fashionthat "... strangely enough,itwas in thelatterhalfoftheseventeenth century, thatthiscruelpenaltyseems an age of comparativeenlightenment, Most of his colleagues, to have been most frequently inflicted".34 though,werecontentto telescopetheentireEuropeanpastintoone thusneatlyshelvingtheproblem. staticera of irrationality, In responseto the positivistinterpretation, J. J. Finkelsteinhas recentlyraisedan oppositetheory.Accordingto him,thetrialsin no viewof theanimalkingdom.To way indicatedan anthropomorphic were a cultural manifestation ofa mentality thecontrary: they specific that placed man above animal in the hierarchyof creationand feltobliged to stampout any infringement of thisorder, therefore suchas thekillingofa humanbeingbya lowercreature.The practice, was specificonlyto theJudaeo-Christian tradition and had therefore, no connectionwithanyinfluencesaliento thisframework. Such was the horrorinspiredby the deed, thatthe Bible was not contentto prescribethe stoningof a goringox, but forbadein additionthe consumptionof its meat. The latterinjunction,Finkelsteinpointed out, must have constituteda considerablehardshipin nomadic society.35 33 Karl von Amirawas thefirst to insistupon thecleardistinction betweenTierstrafe Evans and Frazer (seculartrials)and Tierprocesse (ecclesiasticaltrials).Unfortunately, subsequentlyconfusedtheissue once moreby pilingtherecordofone case upon the otherin an anecdotalmanner.Berkenhoff returnedonce moreto von Amira'sdistincand addinga thirdone (rechtsrituelle tion,renamingthe second categoryTierbannung forthe executionof animalsinvolvedin bestialitycases. Tiertotung) 34 Evans, CriminalProsecution, p. 138. 35 Finkelstein,The Ox thatGored,pp. 48-72.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

18

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

This explanationdoes placethetrialswithina clearculturalcontext. itis thewrongone. Finkelstein's Unfortunately theorydependsupon hisfailuretofindanyanimaltrialsoutsidetheJudaeo-Christian tradioccidentalconceptof the tion,a failurethatderivesfromhis strictly non-western societiesprosejudicialprocess.In factmanynon-literate, thanthe cutedand punishedoffending animals,albeitless formally was conceivedin a difEuropeans,fortheirentirejudicialstructure form.These prosecutions of ferent wereoftenbasedupona perception of being.36 naturethatwas totallyopposed to thewesternhierarchy The idea of animaltrialsalso existedin westerncultureoutsidethe in Plato'swritings.37 Finkelstein reliedheavilyupon Judaictradition, thehorrorinspiredbytheanimal'sact,a feelingsufficiently visceralto of thedeep-seatedcharacter taintthebeast'smeat,inordertoillustrate thehierarchical conception.Thisrepulsiondoesindeedsurfaceinlegal ofthesaid and judicialsources.A bull was sentenced"in detestation of "in horror the detestation and said deed". crime",a pig executed Accordingtoone legalopinion,homicidalanimalsshouldbe executed "in orderto erase all memoryof the enormity of the deed".38 The that such an animal was unclean,however,seemstohavebeen feeling in when the Israelitesrefusedto eat theanimal's strongest antiquity, meatand Plato had the carcass"cast out beyondthebordersof the country".By thetimemedievalanimaltrialswererecorded,theneed to obliterateall tracesof thehorriblecrimewas reservedforcases of Moreoverthe uncleanlinessattachingto theanimaldid bestiality.39 not survivethe merelyhomicidalbeast's death: biblicalinjunctions to themeatofexecutedbeastswas oftendistributed notwithstanding, thetownpoor in theLow Countries.40 Finkelstein'sexplanationfits thecontextofantiquity,notofthemiddleages. 36 For a widerview of law in non-literate societies,see Pospisil,Anthropology of Law, pp. 13-18;forevidenceofhumanjusticemetedout to animalsoutsideEurope, see Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 75-83. From his notes,it is obviousthatFinkelstein work. was unawareof Berkenhoff's 37 Plato, The Laws, trans.R. G. Bury,2 vols. (London, 1968), ii, bk. 9, p. 267. 38 Baupre, 1499: Evans, CnminalProsecution, p. 358; Laon, 1494: ibid., p. 355; JeanDuret, Traitedespeineset amendes(Paris, 1573), p. 36. 39 Von Amira, "Thierstrafen",p. 556; Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 103-7. I have excludedbestialitycases fromdiscussionbecause theconcensusof latemedievaland whose earlymodernjudicialopinionwas thattheseanimalswereinnocentparticipants, destruction (togetherwiththatofall relevanttrialrecords)was necessaryto obliterate criminalium all tracesofthecrime:JodocusDamhouder,Praxisrerum (Antwerp,1555), Saxonicae rerum ch. 96, pp. 351-61; Benedict Carpzov, Practicaenovae imperialis criminalium (Frankfurt,1652), pt. 3, q. 101, art. 20, p. 4; q. 131, art. 16, p. 257. 40 Middelburg,1571: Berkenhoff, Tierstrafe, pp. 30, 126: ". . That the same ox . . should be condemned. . . and the meatdistributed. . . in thiscity". See also

(cont.onp. 19)

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

19

Perhapsthesame concentration upon theancientprecedentlies at therootof Finkelstein'sdismissalof ecclesiasticaltrialsthatpossess no such antecedents,as "magic" ratherthanretributive justice.It is clear, however,that no such distinctionexistedin the minds of medievallegists.Accordingto them,the difference was functional, notcausal: pigsor locustswho harmedman mustalikestandtrialin the interestof universaljustice. Where the secular arm could not reach, God's power was invoked to performthe same task. The bothtypeswas identical,so thatpreceoperativeprincipleunderlying dents could freelybe drawn fromone practicein supportof the other.41 The theory'sgreatweaknesslies in the implicitassumptionthat historicalrealitymightbe inferredfromideologicaldata. As stated above, no such congruenceexisted even betweenmedieval legal ideologyand structure.The gap betweenancientpreceptsand medieval judicialrealitywas evengreater.It is impossibleto assumethat a practicelastingat least fivecenturiesall over Europe could have survivedpurelyon thestrength ofa biblicalprecedent,whensimilar to be had ceased earlier. injunctions legallybindingovera millennium than as Indeed, the Pentateuchserved more oftenas justification actual source for behaviouralmodels. The explanationforanimal trialsmustbe soughtwithintheiractual social and intellectualennotin long-defunct vironment, legislation.42 Consequentlyanyinterto establish not context, pretationseeking precedent,musttakeinto accountthe one factorignoredby thepositivistsand by Finkelstein alike:thedevelopments occurringin anylivingjudicialprocessunder the influenceof one or more culturaltraditions.The chronological and scope of theproblemin itselfshowsthatbetweenthethirteenth the eighteenthcenturymore thanone influencemusthave formed thementalattitudesbehindthetrials.Withina developmental scheme it is possibleto perceivealternatejustification and condemnation of (n. 40 cont.)

BennoJ. Stokvis,"Bijdragetotde kennisvan hetwereldlijke in de dierenproces voorStrafrecht, xli(1931),p. 415. Nederlanden", noordelijke Tijdschrift 41 ThusChassenee seculartrials:"Ifa freely quotesGuiPape'sopinionsupporting brutebeastcommits a crime,as pigswhoeatchildren do, shoulditdie?":Guidonis ofecclesiastical (Geneva,1667),q. 238, pp. 254-5,in hisdefence Papae decisiones trials(Concilium, fo. 16r). 42 Foran discussion onthelimited extent towhichmedieval Christianilluminating andlaws,seeJohnBoswell,Christianity, Social ityacceptedPentateuchal injunctions andHomosexuality in theMiddleAges(Chicago,1980),pp. 102-3.Plato's Tolerance, wasunknown in thewestuntilthelatefifteenth and opinionon thematter century, couldtherefore havehad no influence in thematter. See Raymond The Klibansky, theMiddleAges(London,1939),pp. 21-9. ofthePlatonicTradition Continuity during

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

20

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

one or both typesof trialsat different times,as the culturaland intellectualtrendsof each perioddictated. 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 Bourgoignedoes 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 reluctantto relinquisha layin thecupidityof seigneurialauthorities sourceofincome.The practicewas juridically profitable 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. learnedin bothRomanand cusThough remarkably werelimitedto thepurelypracticalsphere. tomarylaw, his interests in theoretical He was notinterested theforce speculationsconcerning 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 ecclesiasticaljurisdiction overanimals.While Beaumanoirbased his argumenton thelegal conceptof intent,Aquinas centredhis objectionsto 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 Beaude Beauvaisis,ed. A. Salmon,3 vols. (Paris, 1899-1900,repr.1970), manoir,Coutumes ii, p. 481, art. 1944. Generallyspeaking,Beaumanoirstandsout amongthecustomal authorsbyhis organization ofthematerialin judicialcategoriesand hiscommentaries.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE AND ANIMAL LORE

21

sufferno guiltfortheiractions,and consequentlyno punishment. Cursesand anathemaspresupposedboththeobject'sculpabilityand to punishment.In thiscase theobject'snaturevoided itsamenability and nullifiedthecurses.Thus, in thepurelyphilosophicalschemeof things,man and animalwereseparatedby theimpassablebarrierof reason. Aquinas' finalargument,however,bringsthe entireissue back into the realmof theology.Like the restof creation,animals God's will by theiractions.Cursing were God's creaturesfulfilling more than useless: itwas blasphemous.Aquinas was them,therefore, did acknowledgethatnoxiousanimalsmightbe thedevil'semissaries ratherthanGod's, but in thatcase, he pointedout,anyanathemaor adjurationshould be addressedto thewillingauthorof thedamage ratherthanto his unreasoningagents.44 The twocomments,secularand ecclesiastical,areroughlycontemporary,but show no evidence of any mutual influenceor even awareness.Their near-simultaneous appearancewas the expression eliteculturein itsrelationto ofa generaltrendof thirteenth-century to in and manifestations general popular popularconceptionsof the animalkingdomin particular.Throughoutthelatermiddleages and theearlymodernperiodcountryfolk,farfromdenyinganimalsany attributedto themboth reason human characteristics, consistently to learnedopinions.45Beyond the and will in directcontradiction wereinfluenced bya long purelyutilitarian sphere,theirperceptions traditionof the fabulous. This tradition,transmitted throughthe ofclassicalauthors,was rejectedas an expressionofpaganism writings duringthe Carolingianrenaissance.It thus became subsequently identified witha popularlevel of cultureand belief.By the twelfth intotherealmoflearningas a resultofthe centuryit had re-emerged and adaptationof ancientsubstrata".46 The "Christianmodification writingsof Honorius Augustudunensis,Hildegardof Bingen and Lambertof Saint-Omerabound withanimalswho eitherphysically or symbolicallytranscendedthe realmof the natural.Perhapsthe clearestexpressionofthistrendwas therevivaloftheanimalloreofthe classicalPhysiologus in theformofseveraltwelfth-century bestiaries. Thomas Aquinas, Summatheologiae, 2nd pt. of 2nd pt., q. 76. have also Thomas, Man and theNatural World,pp. 75-81; Frenchfolklorists a commonruralelement:"Les gensde campagne,loin foundanimalanthropomorphy de considererles betes comme simples machines,leur attribuentdiversactes qui suppose un raisonnement":Paul Delarue et Marie-LouiseTeneze, Le contepopulaire franqais,3 vols. (Paris, 1957-76),iii, p. 31. 46 Claude Lecouteux, etmerveilleux", Annales.E.S.C., "Paganisme,Christianisme xxxvii(1982), pp. 712, 715-16. 44 45

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

22

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

These handbooksof zoologyall coupled the physicaldescriptionof each animalwithan allegoricalinterpretation, makingno distinction betweenhorsesand unicorns,dogs and basilisks.The naturaland thefabulousinhabitedtheworldoftwelfth-century zoologyin perfect medieval At the same time French literature also incorharmony.47 much fabulous matter not beasts (like the concerning only porated that crossed the borderline bebut also unicorn), beings magically tween the two realms. Mermaids, women-serpents, werewolves, ofmirachild-swansand semi-humansavagespopulatetheliterature bilia.48 ofanimal This tradition stratum was reinforced bya richfolkloristic lore commonto the entireIndo-Europeanworld,aboundingwith elements.These appearedin theformofthebeast anthropomorphic humantraits; where animals did morethanadoptand illustrate epic, theyalso followedhuman legal procedures.The strictimitationof humanjudicial precedentswas especiallycommonin theRomande Renard,wherethecleverfoxstoodtrialbeforeKing Lion, managing to evade retribution The entiretext by theuse ofa legaltechnicality. normsrangingfromloyalty is builtaroundacceptedlegalcustomary and vendettato fraudand rape, withthe camel (the papal legate) supplyingthe ecclesiasticalpointof view.49 the motifsoutsidethebeastepic reinforced Otherpopularliterary involvementof animals in the judicial process. One of the most popularoftheseduringthelatermiddleagesand earlymodernperiod in France was the so-calleddog of Montargis.The legendis based houndwho avengesits master's upon a universalmotif:thefaithful murder.The westernmedievalversion,however,had thedog do so in a formaljudicialduel withthemurderer.The talewas firstwritten in thetwelfth centuryas a chansonde geste,now lost. In thisversion 47 Concerningbestiaries,see especiallyFlorenceMcCulloch, MedievalLatin and FrenchBestiaries(Chapel Hill, 1962); M. James,"The Bestiary",History,new ser., xvi (1931), pp. 1-11. 48 Daniel Poirion,Le merveilleux dans la litterature franqaisedu moyenage (Paris, 1982), pp. 29-30, 110-15. 49 Jean Deroy, "Le discoursdu chameau,legatpapal, dans le Romande Renard", Beast Epic, Fable in JanGoossensand TimothySodmann(eds.), ThirdInternational and Fabliau Colloquium(Cologne, 1981), pp. 102-7. The tale's Germanversion, ReinhartFuchs,was writtenas a satireon late twelfth-century imperialjustice.More thanany otherversion,thisone is entirelybuiltupon judicial situationsof lineage loyalty,vendettaand trial.See SigridKrause, "Le ReinhartFuchs,satirede la justice et du droit", in Danielle Buschingerand Andre Crepin (eds.), Comique,satireet etlesfabliaux(Goppingen,1983), pp. 139-51.For renardienne parodiedansla tradition see JosephBedier,Les fabliaux: thecommonIndo-Europeanoriginsof thistradition, du moyen litteraire Etudesde litterature age,6thedn. (Paris, 1969). populaireetd'histoire

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

23

both victimand murdererwere knightsin Charlemagne'scourtof the epic legends. Afterits master'smurderin the forest,the dog returnedalone to the emperor'scourt,whereits continualattacks upon themurderer,coupledwithitsmaster'sdisappearance,excited The dog was allowed to enough suspicionto warrantverification. in its accusation" like man a a duel, wherehe vanquishedthe "prove murdererwho then confessedthe truthand was executed. The storyenjoyedconsiderablepopularityand a numberofversionsand translations duringthefollowingcenturies.By thesixteenth century tradition had so internalizedthe tale thatit transferred the popular eventsfromCharlemagne'smythicalcourtand timeto CharlesV's and historihistoricalcourtat Montargisin 1371. The verisimilitude of were the established the fifteenth alreadysufficiently city myth by to citation as its Olivier de la Marche in century justify precedentby his treatiseon duels.50 The tale of thedog of Montargisis therefore remarkablenotonly foritslongevity. It containsabsolutelyno anthropomorphic, symbolic or fabulouselements,and thereinlies its plausibilityforthe early modern audience. Readers accustomedto seeing flesh-and-blood animals stand trial as a matterof course could easily accept the of a storythatplaced a dog in anotherjudicialsituation. historicity Threecenturiesearlier,however,beforethisacceptancehad had time to crystallize,the dog of Montargiswas considereda myth,not a historicalfact.And in thethirteenth centuryanimalmotifsthattook outside the purelyfactualrealm came under theirsubject-matter attackby learnedelements,bothsecularand ecclesiastical. The mainstreamof thirteenth-century thoughtwas directed towardstheconsolidationofall knowledgein elitistforms,reflecting a totallyhierarchicaluniversethat allowed no mixed categories. naturalphilosophy,the leading Stronglyinfluencedby Aristotelian thinkers of thistrendrejectedbeliefin mostextra-natural manifestationsinconsistent withthe immutablecategoriesof nature.Outside the realm of theology,most of those beliefswere categorizedas popular superstitions expressedin fablesand myths.The learned elite, not contentwith the compilationof summae,was dedicated to the eradicationof superstitions. The attackwas carriedbeyond academicfulminations intothe pulpitsby preachers,manyof them Dominicanslike Thomas Aquinas. One of the main targetsof this 50 J. Viscardi,Le chiende Montargis:Etudedefolklore juridique(Paris, 1932), pp. 54-67; Olivierde la Marche, Traitezet advis de quelquesgentilhommes francoissurles duelset lesgagesde bataille(Paris, 1586), fos. 8-9.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

24

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

thattendedtoblurthedistinction offensive was thefabuloustradition betweenhumanand animalrealms.Preachersinveighedagainstthe beliefin "mixedbeings"- partlyman,partlybeast- condemning it at bestas ignorantsuperstition and at worstas demonolatry. With theelimination offabulouscreatures,animalswereonce morefirmly relegatedto theirsubordinatepositionin the hierarchyof the universe.51 The oppositionto animal trialsin the thirteenth centurymust be seen againstthisbackgroundof uncompromising antitherefore mentalattitudesperpopular rationalism.The anthropomorphic ceivedin thoseproceedingsmadethemunacceptabletoan intellectual elitethatrejectedanyblurringofboundariesbetweenmanand beast. ofanimal failed.The tradition But in thisfieldthelearnedoffensive of roots in elements folklore and trialsmay have had its paganism, intoinstitutional butit was too deeplyintegrated legalproceduresto be easily eradicated.The continuedsurvivalof animal trialsmust be examinedin thecontextoflatemedievaljudicialdeveloptherefore ments. THE SECULAR DEFENCE

ofanimaltrialsin thethirteenth elicited The learnedcriticism century verylittlewrittenresponseby way of apologeticsor justification. norrecordersofpractisedlaw at thetimewere Neitherpractitioners was much given to theorizing.Perhaps continuedimplementation felt no for lawmen need theoretical themosteffective retort,and any underpinningsfora practicehallowedby age and custom. Of all the customarylaw textscompiledin France duringthe fourteenth century,onlyJeanBoutillier'sSommerural,recordingthe customs of the Tournaisis,mentionsand justifiesanimal trials.Boutillier's frameof reference, however,is singularenoughto warrantdetailed examination. Under the rubricDe la bestetuerhommeBoutillierprescribes the executionof killeranimalsby virtueof the biblicalinjunction. However,he adds, ifthevictimwas a serfthebeastshouldbe spared and its owner pay the serfs lord 30 denierssilversymbolizingthe thirtygenerationsthat issued fromCham, Noah's cursed son.52 51 J.-C. Schmitt,Le saint levrier(Paris, 1979), pp. 27-42; J.-C. Schmitt,"Les traditionsfolkloriquesdans la culturemedievale",Archivesdes sciencessocialesdes lii (1981), pp. 14-16. religions, 52 JeanBoutillier, Le grandcoustumier generaldepratique,aultrement appelleSomme rural,ed. L. Charondasle Caron (Paris, 1621), p. 267; thecustomsof Burgundythat (cont.on p. 25)

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

25

The referenceto Cham, which has no precedentin any legal or ecclesiasticalsource,bringsout thequasi-religiousaspectof animal executionand the execrablecharacterof a God-cursedcrime.This repeateduse of the Bible, both literaland allegorical,is unusual law. Some enoughin legaltexts,especiallythoserecording customary customalsdid no more than to set down the facts,while others, notablythose of Beaumanoirand Boutillier,attemptedto impose on specific someorderupon theirmaterialand providea commentary of In this articles custom. enterprisetheyalmostinvariablyrelied the and upon categories conceptsof Roman,notancientJudaiclaw. in thewordsof also They soughttheirprecedentsand justifications not of Moses. Justinian, This departurefromusual methodscan onlybe understoodwithin thecontextoftheprocessescustomary in France law was undergoing centuries. the thirteenth and fourteenth The during privateredaction of customsbegan around the middle of the thirteenth centuryin variousareas of northernFrance, continuingwell into thefifteenth describcentury.Most oftenthesecollectionswereoflocal character, of law in a area. Most of the de droit ecrit the ing practice specific pays written customals the end of the middle such by privately possessed ages. They were writtenby local baillis,administrators, judges and councillors.Most of these authorspossessed legal trainingin civil toapproximate theirmaterial law,a factoftenevidentin theirattempts to Roman models. Nevertheless,theywereno university professors who occasionallygave an outsideopinion. They were practitioners of customarylaw, in need of a handbook,not of theory.53 The reasonforthis plethoraof customalslies in the paradoxical developmentof law at the time. While customwas by definition ancientpractice,realitysaw it undergoingconstantmodification. Therewas a varietyoffactorsat work:firstand foremost, thegrowth of royalpowerand of theconceptof thekingas lawmakercreateda whole body of royalordinancesthatcould and oftendid supersede local customs. Beyond legislation,customarylaw was constantly made and re-made by judicial verdicts,some of them in direct totheancientoralcustom.It was thisfactthatprompted contradiction Pierrede FontainestowritethecustomsofVermandois.Local judges (n. 52 cont.)

also ordainedanimalexecutionsmightdatefromthefirsthalfofthefourteenth century, but theyprovidenothingbeyond the statementof custom. For Boutillierand his ende Sommerural(Louvain, 1951). influence,see Guido van Dievoet,JehanBoutillier 53 Auguste Lebrun, La coutume: Ses sources- son autoriteen droitprive(Paris, et la preuvedes coutumes, 1932), pp. 71-2; Pissard,La connaissance pp. 161-3.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

so farreliedupon theiropinionsand prejudicesratherthanupon the custom,that"the countryis practicallydevoid of custom".54In de Fontaines'sopinion, it was the ruler'sdutyto enforcethe proper custom.55Indeed, Saint Louis applicationof ancientunadulterated concurredin thisopinion,forin 1270 he regulatedtheinquestspar turbewhose purposeit was to establishin writingand approveby royalcommandthe exact customof each locality.56But even this and adaptationofancient procedurecouldresultin somemodification customsto modernneeds. Finally,thecontinuousgrowthofRoman and canon law studies inevitablyinfluencedcustoms.Though all thatin thepaysde droitcoutumier Roman customalauthorsaffirmed law had no power,a statement repeatedin royalordinancesas well,57 theyconsistently quoted Roman matterin theircollections,adding to theprocessof changein theirveryattemptto preserve.This was doneespeciallyin theweakerareasofcustomary law,suchas contract canonlawinfluences and obligationlaws. Similarly, modified customlaws in certain France.58 ordinances of ary marriage parts Royal in suchmatters, buttheyhad considerableinfluence rarelyintervened upon police and criminalpractice. The contradiction betweenthedynamicchangesin customon the one handand itsemphasisupon constancyon theotherhandprovide thebasis notonlyfortheact ofwriting,butalso theincentiveforthe and reason.Ifcustomcannotremainunchanged searchofjustification fromtimes immemorial,it must at least accord with reason and naturallaw.59Thoughno one definedexactlywhatthesetermsmeant, theywereusuallyconnectedwitheitherRomanor canonlaw models. Consequentlyauthorssoughtwheneverpossible, not so much to law in linewithRomanmaximsbutratherto clothe bringcustomary of Roman terminology. its manifestations in the respectability Seen in thislight,animaltrialspresenteda ratherdifficult problem. Not only did Roman law include no such practice,it specifically 54 Pierrede Fontaines,Conseila un ami, ed. A. J. Marnier(Paris, 1846), ch. 1, art. 3. 55 Ibid., ch. 22, arts. 31-3. 56 Pissard,La connaissance et la preuvedes coutumes, pp. 112-58. 57 Ordonnances des roisde Francede la troisieme race,ed. E. de Lauriereet al., 21 ed. vols. (Paris, 1723-1849),i, p. 313; Guillaumedu Brueil,Stiluscurieparlamenti, Felix Aubert(Paris, 1909), pp. 5, 20-1, 52, makesit clearthatRomanlaw carriedno whatsoeverin the terraconsuetudinaria. authority 58 Thus in twelfth-century Normandycanonlaw pressureresultedin themodificainalienable: tionof thecustomarydotalregime,makingwomen'sdowrieshenceforth Lebrun,La coutume,pp. 38-9. 59For a listof sourcesstatingthisrequirement, see ibid., pp. 50-1.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE AND ANIMAL LORE

27

enunciatedthe principleofNoxae deditioin such cases, statingthat the offendinganimal should be turnedover to the injuredparty. While this principledid assume thatthe consequencesof the deed wereto be borneby theoffending agency,theseconsequenceswere in no way punitive.Rather,theinjuredpartywas compensatedby a transfer of property.The animalwas therefore viewedas a chattel, nota sentientbeing. In thiscase, customwas in directcontradiction to the Roman precedent.Significantly, not onlywas the offending animaloftenpenalized,but even thosethatweresparedwereforfeit to the justice, not to the injured party.The elementof private compensationwas totallylackingin customarylaw.60 This essentialdifference betweenthetwosystems probablyexplains thesilenceofmostfourteenth-century customalson thesubject.61 The of trials author to insist the animal only upon legitimacy (extremely commonin his own jurisdiction)was forcedto invokean even more venerableprecedentthanJustinian. The BibleprovidedBoutillier with thebestofprecedents.However,his subsequentadditionconcerning a probable Germanic serfsindicates,despite biblical attributions, silveris strongly remioriginofthecustom.The paymentof30 deniers niscentofthe30 solidiofwergildpayableforkilledserfsin theancient Burgundianand Salian codes.62It is no coincidencethatthosecodes werewrittenand used duringtheearlymiddleages in theverysame areathatlatersawthefirst appearanceofanimaltrials.Noris itchance thattheywere recordedonlyin the customalsof thosesame areas, thoughby thefourteenth centurytheywererifeall overFrance. The embarrassedsilenceof mostcustomalshad littleeffectupon continuedpractice.Animaltrialscontinuedto be held evenwithout a Roman precedent.In the followingcenturies,while Beaumanoir Boutillierenjoyed greatinfluenceand popularity.63 lay forgotten, his workand thatofothercustomal Despite his Roman sympathies, writerseffectively of Roman law as the preventedthe introduction operativecode of the realm.Customarylaw, providedwithrespectCorpusiuriscivilis,ed. P. Kruger,T. Mommsenand R. Scholl,3 vols. (Berlin, 4.9; Digesta9.1. The Englishpracticeofdeodand,or surrender 1884-95),i, Institutiones of the offending animalto the king,parallelsFrenchcustomto some extent.Still,it and is therefore irrelevant impliesonce morecompensationratherthanpunishment, to our argument. 61 It is noteworthy thatBeaumanoir,despitehis familiarity withand respectfor Roman law, did not use it in his condemnationof animaltrials. 62 Lex Salica, ed. K. A. Eckhardt(MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica, Leges nationumGermanicarum,Hanover, 1888-1969,iv), i, ch. 35, art. 2, p. 129; Leges Liberconstitutionum, ed. L. R. de Salis (ibid., ii), i, ch. 10, p. 50. Burgundionum, 63 Dievoet,JehanBoutillier,pp. 116-24. 60

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

28

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

able formand ancestryand includinganimaltrials,survivedformany centuriesto come, eventuallyachievingformalpublicredactionand the statusof royallegislation.64 THE ECCLESIASTICAL DEFENCE

Whilecustomary law actuallyrequiredverylittletheoretical basisfor its practice,canon law was a different matter.Ecclesiasticalanimal trialsraisedsome of themostcrucialpointsoftheChristianviewof vindication nature,man and justice.In consequence,thetheoretical ofthesetrialsappearedinresponsetotheirspreadduringthefifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.Specialistsin Romanand canon law devotedlong treatisesto the subject,citingbothbiblicalprecedents and scholasticargumentsin supportof the practice.One of thesetreatises,GasparBailly'sTraitedesmonitoires, wentso faras to describetheexactprocedureand argumentation ofa purelyputative trial.65Taken in conjunctionwithcontemporary trialrecords,this literatureclearlyshows thatthoughecclesiasticalexcommunication of animals was known before,its popularityas a commonlegal recoursedates onlyfromthe fifteenth century.This procedurehad its culturaland legal rootsin a traditionclearlydistinctfromthe secularcustom.Though defendersof ecclesiasticaltrialsknewand were preparedto use the secularapologeticswheneverconvenient, boththeincreasingly popularpracticeand theoryofthetrialsbelong to a different facetof culturalexpression.The learneddefenceof ecclesiasticalanimaltrialstookplace duringtheperiodusuallyidentifiedwith anothertrend,namelythe persecutionof witches.The close parallelsbetweentwo phenomena,bothincorporating religion and legal processes,raisethepossibilityof crossinginfluences.The conceptof the devil as the enemyof the humanrace could interact witha resultant withthe idea of animalsharminghumaninterests, of reactionto boththreats. similarity involved. Firstofall, it is necessaryto definethetypeofwitchcraft have Kieckhefer,Horsley,and severalotherstudentsofwitch-hunts noted alreadythe discrepancybetweenpopular beliefsin practical The sorceryand learnedconceptionsofdiabolismand devil-worship. mainlyduringtheearlystagesofthewitch-hunts, gap was significant 64 Rene Filhol, "La redactiondes coutumesen France aux XVe et XVI siecles", descoutumes dans lepasse etdanslepresent in J. Gilissen(ed.), La redaction (Brussels, 1962), pp. 63-86. 65 See nn. 26, 27 above,and von Amira,"Thierstrafen", pp. 570-2,fora fullreview of the legal-canonistic literature.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

29

beforethe learned traditionhad forciblybeen incorporatedinto centurysimplefolk popularconsciousness.Thus bythelatesixteenth before the of Paris and the werespontaneously confessing parlement Geneva consistoryto diabolic pacts and sabbath-rides.Kieckhefer has shownhow, a centuryand a halfearlier,people broughtin for sorceryended by confessingto diabolic practicesaftertortureand oflearneddemonology inquisitorialquestioning.The internalization was to the elements due persistent pressureofinquisitorial bypopular the results evident becoming especiallyafterthe middleof activity, The influence of theinquisition'squestioning thefifteenth century.66 methodsand ideas is also apparentin the factthatrecordsof early secularwitchtrialscontainfarfewerdiabolicalelementsthaneither ecclesiasticalor later secular cases.67Consequently, contemporary whenattempting to drawanalogiesbetweenwitchand animaltrials, one cannotconsiderthe entiretraditionof witchbeliefs.The only possiblyrelevantparallelsto elitist,ecclesiasticaljudicialproceedings against animals are the elitist,ecclesiasticaljudicial proceedings against witches.68Most relevant,of course, are the concepts of animalsvoiced in theseproceedings. betweenthelearnedand thepopular There was a cleardifference and sorcery.In cases perceptionof the role of animalsin witchcraft relatingto simple,functional magic,animalsassumedan indisputably naturalform. Some were used for the makingof potions: toads, thanksto theirpoisonousqualities,came in forfrequentmention. Most animals,especiallydomesticones, wereseen as objectsof,not participantsin magic acts: cows that gave blood insteadof milk, 66 Richard Kieckhefer,EuropeanWitchTrials (London, 1976); R. A. Horsley, "Who Were the Witches?The Social Roles of the Accused in the EuropeanWitch Trials", Jl. Interdisciplinary Hist., ix (1979), pp. 689-715; R. A. Horsley,"Further Reflectionson Witchcraftand European Folk Religion", Historyof Religions,xix (1979), pp. 71-95; Norman Cohn, Europe's InnerDemons(New York, 1975); E. WilliamMonter,"Witchcraft in Geneva 1537-1662",Ji. Mod. Hist., xliii(1971), p. 199; AlfredSoman, "Les proces de sorcellerieau parlementde Paris (1565-1640)", Annales.E.S.C., xxxii(1977), pp. 800-3; Keith Thomas, Religionand theDeclineof in Englandsomewhat Magic(London, 1971),pp. 512-19,presentsa similardichotomy laterthanin the Continent. 67 Kieckhefer, EuropeanWitchTrials,pp. 18-23,32-6; theauthorhimselfseemsto be unawareof the judicial significance of his data. 68 The legal aspectof witch-hunting has longbeen neglectedin favourofthestudy of its social implications.For a recentattemptto rectify the omission,see Christina in Europe", inV. A. C. Gatrell, Larner,"CrimenExceptum?The CrimeofWitchcraft B. Lenman and G. Parker(eds.), Crimeand theLaw (London, 1980), pp. 49-75; ofwitchcraft; on thissubject, Larner,though,ignorestheproblemofdual jurisdiction see JosephHansen,Zauberwahn,Inquisition undHexenprozess imMittelalter (Munich, 1900, repr. Aalen, 1964).

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

30

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

sheep thatdied as a resultof a curse,etc. Conversely,the learned traditionsaw both domesticand wild animals as active agentsin devilsappearedeverywhere in thelore diabolicrites.Theriomorphic of of demonology,fromsimplewitches'familiarsto theincarnation evilspirits.Animalscarriedwitchesto theirsabbaths,wherethedevil himselfoccasionallyassumedanimalform.69 Did thesesupernatural animalshave anyconnectionwiththetrialsofrats,locustsand eels? and seventeenth-century on The wealthofsixteenthargumentation the subjecthas providedseveralinsightsintocontemporary percephadextended tionsofnoxiousanimals.Bythistimeincreasing literacy the scope of writtenevidencebeyondthe rarifiedcirclesof leading juristsand theologians.By theearlymodernperiodit is possibleto notonlytheviewsoftheparlement andtheuniverdetermine president sityprofessor,but also of thelocal priestor canon. As mightbe expected,morevariedsourcesinevitably providemorecomplexanswers. The one point upon which everyoneagreed was the harmful characteroftheanimalsin question.The reasonbehindtheiractions, however,was in doubt. Many bishopsassumedthattheywereoften God's emissaries,therefore insistingupon communalpenitencebeforecommencinganylegal proceedings.The eminentSpanishtheologian,Martinde Azpilcueta,concurred,pointingout thatprayers and fastingwere far more efficaciousthan exorcismsin this case. Conversely,he argued,theymightbe the devil's agents,in which case theclergywould do betterto addresstheexorcismto themaster ratherthanto his servants.70 Seemingly,Azpilcuetaconsideredthe fishnear Sorrento(the reasonforhis opinion)as belongingto the lattercategory,forhe refersto themas "cacodemons". Frenchjuristsdiscussingthesubjectprovidean evenmoreinteresting approach.UnlikeAzpilcueta,neitherChasseneenorBaillywere clergymenor theologians.They were secular juristswho had had buttheirapproachwas occasionto arguebeforeecclesiastical'courts, excluded different. Both agency entirely anysupernatural necessarily at workbehind the animals' depredations.Animalswere insensate and irrational,acting presumablyof theirown impulses,not the 69 For animalsin popular sorcery,see Horsley,"Who Were the Witches?",pp. on Witchcraft", 697 ff.;Horsley,"FurtherReflections pp. 84-5. For theriomorphic devils and animals in sataniccults, see Cohn, Europe'sInnerDemons,esp. ch. 11; in theMiddleAges (Ithaca, N.Y., 1972), pp. 105-13, B. Russell, Witchcraft Jeffrey Witchin Geneva",p. 196; bycontrast,H. C. E. Midelfort, 188; Monter,"Witchcraft Germany,1562-1684(Stanford,1972), p. 106, foundvery Huntingin South-Western littleanimalimageryof the devil in his area of research. 70

See n. 24 above.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

31

devil's. Nevertheless,both recommendedexcommunication in the interestsof the humanrace. In the hierarchyof creation,the lower echelonsexistedfortheconvenienceand utilityofman. Justlikethe homicidalpigs,locustsconsuminga harvestdestinedto feedhumans were infringing upon the order of the universe.Thus Chassenee argued that though,in themselves,irrationalcreatureswere not amenableto excommunication, in theirrelationto man theywere, fortheyhad oversteppedtheirboundaries.In a way, thisapproach was ruthlessly utilitarianand anthropocentric.71 Not all authoritieswere as consistent.A centuryearlierwhen animaltrialsweregraduallybecomingmorepopular,FelixMalleolus of Switzerlandofferedno argumentation, merelythe precedents and procedureof animalexorcism.While the Swiss juristcarefully avoidedanymentionofdemonicpowersat workamongtheanimals, his methodsare telling. Unlike the French juristshe mentioned neitheranathemanor excommunication (which,in a human case, wouldbe utilizedagainsta sinner,nota demonicagent),butexorcism withits diabolic connotations.Though the technicaltermwas used fora varietyofprocedures,theyall retainedthebasic meaningofthe use of divine power by ecclesiasticalauthorityforthe purpose of ejectingundesirable,usuallydemonicelementsfromtheirhabitat. Formulaeof exorcismvariedaccordingto place and circumstance, butall exhibitedthedominanceofspiritualpoweroveritsopponents, naturalorotherwise.72 Whileitis doubtfulthatanimaltrialsborrowed thesentenceofexorcismfromwitchcraft cases,bothpracticesreliedin theirusageuponthesameecclesiastical-judicial tradition ofexorcisms The paralleluse of the same ritual goingback to earlyChristianity. of expulsionin bothinstancessuggestsa similarperceptionof both minds. proceduresin contemporary This perceptioncan be seen in the fateof Malleolus' works.His two treatiseson animaltrials,both entitledDe exorcismis, were the bestknownworkson thesubjectin thefifteenth century.Originally buttowards theywerepublishedin a collectionofMalleolus'writings, theend ofthesixteenth centurytheywereincludedin a collectionof tractateson witchcraft and demonologypublishedas a companion volume to the Malleus maleficarum.73 The editorsof the Malleus 71 fos.14- 16v;Bailly,Traitedesmonitoires, in Evans,Criminal Chassen6e,Concilium, Prosecution, pp. 287-306. 72 Felix Malleolus,"Tractatusde exorcismis",fos.74v-79r; J. Forget,"Exorcisme", de theologie Dictionnaire catholique,15 vols. (Paris, 1926-50),v, pp. 1762-80;forthe natureofanimalexorcism ormaledictio, seevonAmira,"Thierstrafen", specific pp. 561-7. 73 The additionalvolume was publishedin Frankfurt,1582, Lyons, 1584, and severalsubsequenteditionsof theMalleus maleficarum.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

32

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

consideredtreatisesdealingexclusivelywithanimaltrialsrelevantto the prosecutionof witches,even if theyneveronce mentionedthe devil. Evidentlytheconnectionbetweenthetwolayin theprocedure of exorcism. was more concernedwith the Fifteenth-century witch-hunting thanwiththe exorcismof innodestructionof guiltypractitioners centlypossessed victims.By the late sixteenthcenturyexorcisms were becomingmore centralto the prosecutionof witches.74This notonlyin thelong-lasting ofMalleolus' factwas reflected popularity 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 demonicagencyto be atwork,theydid evincethesameanthropocentric and utilitarian approachvoicedbyFrenchjurists.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 fromdemonic by the same author, applied to animals suffering possession,forbidsthe devil access to a certainplace "in detriment . . of all thingsgrantedby God forthe use of humanbeings".76 74 See RobertMandrou,Magistrats etsorciers enFranceau XVIIe siecle(Paris, 1980), pp. 163-79,251-60. 75 "I adjure you, beetles,who dissipateand destroythefoodof menin thisplace, and go whereyoucan harmnobody"("Adiurovos, thatyou shoulddeparthenceforth . . . ut a limaces .. .alimenta hominumdissipantiaet corrodentiahoc in territoria 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 and fleethisbody and Father,the Son, and the Holy Ghost,to departimmediately neffandissimos et abominabilesspiritus divinematter"("Coniuro vos superscriptos qui hanccreaturamDei N. occupareet molestare. .. noncessatis,perpatrem,filium, et spiritumsanctum. . . ut statimexeatiset fugiatisde vase isto et plasmateDei in Thesaurusexorcismorum . ."): HyeronimusMengus, Flagellumdaemonum, 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,Manualeexorcismorum,in Thesaurus,pp. 1201, 1190.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

33

fromjudicialtreExorcismmanualsbelongto a spheredifferent atises.Theirauthorswereusuallypriestsormonksin needofpractical animaltrials, information. century By thesecondhalfofthesixteenth animalpossessionand demonologicallorehad becomefirmly enough in Europeanperceptions toallowlessthaneruditesources entrenched theexpressionofan independentattitude.In thiscase theexpression camefromMartinofArles,a modestarchdeaconfromPamplona,no in legal luminarybut a mostdeterminedfighter againstsuperstition all forms.In a scathingcondemnationof most popular pseudomedical and magic practicesknown to him, Martin ratherunexpectedlyapprovedtheconjuringofwolvesoffdomesticanimals.He based his argumentupon the legitimacyof animalexorcism,which he wronglyattributed to SaintThomas. Accordingto Martin'sreadhad arguedthat,as thedeviluses animals ing,theSummatheologiae to cause people harm,it is permissibleto use exorcismin orderto exclude demonicinfluencesfromthe animaldomain.77 Martinof Arleswas a contemporary of Chassenee,but thedifference betweentheirattitudesis indicativeofthegap separating learned and popularconceptionsof animaljustice.Significantly, the source in thiscase is neitherfolkloristic nor elitist,but intermediate. The Navarresearchdeaconwas familiarwithcontemporary practices,but like otherapologistsin his positionhe feltcompelledto justifyhis Whetherdeliberateor not, opinionbyquotingan eminentauthority. themisquotationof SaintThomas indicatestheintermediary's need to legitimizepracticeby meansoftheory.Martin'slegalbackground was sketchy,to saytheleast,buthisLatinwas goodenoughforbooktheideal spokesmanforattitudesthateven writing.He was therefore a centuryearlierwould have foundexpressionnot in writing,only in practice. Indeed, practiceprovidesthe strongestargumentforconnecting thetwophenomena,fortheyexhibita correlation oftimeand space. Both animal and witch trials seem to have become increasingly commonin Switzerlandand the adjoiningFrenchand Italianareas duringthe fifteenth century,and the coincidenceis all the more because of the almosttotalabsenceofanyearliertradition of striking secularanimaltrialsin Switzerland.78 Not surprisingly, Switzerland also witnessedtheemergenceofa hybridtypeofprocess:thetrialof an individualanimal by a secularcourton chargesof supernatural 77 Martinde Ariesy Andosilla,Tractatus de superstitionibus contra seu maleficia inorbeterrarum sortilegia quaehodievigent (Rome,1559),fos.28r-29r. 78 Cohn,Europe's InnerDemons, pp. 225-6.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

34

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

behaviour.As mightbe expected,thereis no recordof such trials beforethe late fifteenth century,by whichtimethe demonological of a well-establishedidea. In form,they animals was potential conformedto the secular animal trialtradition;the culpritswere invariablyindividualdomesticanimalsratherthandrovesof insects or shoalsoffish,thetrialsalwaysendingwiththeexpectedexecution. In content,however,theyrepresenta divergencefromthe typeof virtueof the non-homicidalcharges and the use of the hitherto uncommonwitches'pyreforexecution.They weredefinitely informed by theecclesiasticaltraditionofwitchtrials,as well as thelong traditionof fabulousanimals. The mostremarkableof thesetrialswas theearliestknowncase. The executionofa cockin Basle (1474) is clearevidenceoftheextent to which the theriomorphic perceptionof devils had servedto reintroduceanimalsinto the realmof the supernatural, whencethirtrationalistshad triedto expel them. The cock was eenth-century actuallyexecutedforlayingan egg; ifallowedto hatch,such an egg would produce a basilisk.79The beliefthatbasiliskswere hatched in learnedtradition. fromroosters'eggsgoes back overa millennium It was broughtup firstby Plinyand Solinus. Subsequently,Isidore of Seville repeatedit in the seventhcentury,Pierreof Beauvais, and HildegardofBingenin thetwelfth, Pseudo-HugoofSaint-Victor and VincentofBeauvaisin thethirteenth Indeed,thelast century.80 sourcewas familiarto the Basle chroniclerwho recordedthe case, thoughapparentlyby thenthe beliefhad permeatedpopularstrata as well. Most authorities agreedroughlythatthebasilisk,a fabulous beast,halfcock and halfserpent,came out ofan egg laid by an aged thatthebasiliskexuded roosterand hatchedbya toad.The conviction poison and killed by look, smell and contactexplainsthe alarmof the Basle authorities.One can see the previouslyrejectedfabulous 79 JohanGross,KruzerBasslerChronik(Basle, 1624), p. 120, recountedthe facts accordingto Hans Knebel,chaplainoftheBasle church,whohad witnessedtheevent: Diarium,ed. W. Vischerand E. Boos (Leipzig, 1880). 80 Pliny,Naturalishistoria, ed. C. Mayhoff(Leipzig, 1892-1909),8.21.33, 29.4.19; ed. T. Mommsen (Berlin, 1864), 27.51; Solinus, Collectanearerummemorabilium, libriXX, ed. W. M. Lindsay(Oxford, Isidore of Seville,Etymologiae sive originum 1911), 12.4.6-9; Pierreof Beauvais, "Bestiaireen prose de Pierrele picard", ed. C. d'histoire etde littrature, ii (1851), pp. Cahierand A. Martin,Melangesd'archeologie, De bestiiset aliis rebus(Patrologiaecursuscompletus, 213-14; Hugo of Saint-Victor, ed. J.-P. Migne, Series latina, 221 vols., Paris, 1844-55,clxxvii),3.41, col. 100; libri diversarum naturarum creaturarum Hildegardof Bingen,Physica,seu subtilitatum novem(ibid., cxcvii),9.12, col. 1343; VincentofBeauvais,Speculumnaturale(Douai, 1624),bk. 1, 20.22-4,pp. 1472-4;McCulloch,Bestiaries, pp. 93, 199-200;L. Tolmer, Folk-loreet biologie:Les oeufsde coq et basilic(Bayeux, 1928), pp. 16-24.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE

AND ANIMAL LORE

35

oflegalculture.Though withintheframework traditionre-emerging the beliefin the basiliskwas age-old,it occurredto no one actually to executea livingcock beforethe fifteenth century,and the case betweenlegalpracticeand cultural indicatesthedegreeofintegration The existenceof an analogoussynthesisin therealmof traditions.81 the similarity witchtrialsservesto strengthen betweenthe two. There is a clear correlationbetweenthe variousopinionsvoiced and actionstakenabout animaltrialsand the author'sstatusin the socio-culturalscale. While theologiansand juristsdid theirbest to keepdemonologyoutofthetrials,relyingon theirphilosophicalview one progresses ofjusticeand theuniverseforjustification, thefarther on theroadfromtheorytopractice,thecloserbecomestheconnection betweennoxiousanimalsand noxiousdevils. Exorcistsapplied the same meansto both,implyingthatharmto mankindmustoriginate withitseternalenemy.Judgesfinallysaw someanimalsnotas agents, ofthedevil.This progressive butas activeincarnations demonization oftheanimalkingdomwas contemporary withthegenerallyincreasing internalizationby popular elementsof learned demonology. Whethertheriomorphic devilsfirstappearedin a witchcraft or in an animaltrialmatterslittle.By the sixteenthcenturytheywere there as partof one judicial-theological tradition,and theyremainedpart of the European legal scene as long as thewitchesburned. CONCLUSION

Perceptionsand uses of justiceare excellentmirrorsofthementality of an age. In a purelypositivesystemof law theydelineateman's conceptof necessaryand desirablesocietalrelationships.In an allinclusivesystemencompassingalso the extra-humanworld, they revealman's view of his place withintheuniversalschemeas well. Animal trialsbelong squarelyin the lattertypeof judicial system. They expresseda perceptionof law thatheld swayover the entire universe.The idea thatthewholeworldis subjectto God's law runs throughoutChristian theology. Thomas Aquinas clearly distinguishedthemechanicaluniversallaw thatgovernednaturalphenomenaand had no moralimplications fromhuman,positivelaw. Even 81 The motif ofthecock's eggsis an interesting illustration ofthemobilityofbeliefs betweenthe realmsof popularand eliteculture.Born as partof a learnedtradition, it was transposedvia the judicial channelintothe level of Europeanpeasantbeliefs, whereitcould stillbe foundin thenineteenth century.See E. Rolland,Faunepopulaire de la France, 12 vols. (Paris, 1877-1915),vi, pp. 84-90.

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

36

PAST AND PRESENT

NUMBER 110

Thomas, though,admittedtheexistenceof an independentconcept of equityside by side withlaw. His less systematic successors,especiallythoseversedmorein law thanin philosophyand theology,no longerdistinguished universal fromhumanlaw, or equityfromthemboth. They viewedjusticeas a universalattribute, status applicableto all nature.The pre-eminent ofman in creation,whichthescholasticsused to distancehimas far as possiblefromthe restof nature,became centurieslaterthebasis of the argumentforuniversaljustice.If man was to rule nature,he must do so according to the same principlesthat governedhis relationshipswithfellowhumans. This did not mean thatanimals deservedthe same rightsas people. They too were subjectto the universallaw thathad placed thembelow man, and musttherefore refrainfromharminghim. The principleofgranting justice"to each his own" operatedalso beyondthe boundariesof humanity.While theseideas wereexpresslymentionedonlyin ecclesiasticalcases,they werelatentalso in theseculartrials.The strictobservanceofjudicial (not necessarilyhuman)procedureaccordingto theletterofthelaw carefullyexoneratedthese trialsfromany appearanceof lynching. The animalsgot theirjust due. This perceptionof law is closely tied with the view of man's relationshipwithGod. While man mayhave possessedtherightto judge animals,he did not have it by virtueof his own nature.The regulationof the universefellsquarelywithinthedomainof divine legislation,and anyhumansentencepassed upon animalsdepended entirelyforitsvalidityand forceupon divinejustice.It gave man an extraordinary power over nature,so thathe could even pronounce exorcismsin God's name notonlyupon animals,but also upon the fourphysicalelements.82As a rule, thisforcewas grantedman for his struggleagainst supernaturalevil, but could also be used to implementuniversaljustice,especiallywhenthetwoaimsconverged upon one object. This view was reinforcedby popularperceptionsof animalsthat and symbolic had long attributedto them both anthropomorphic In therealmofliterature fabulousanimalspossessing characteristics. supernaturalpowers forgood or forevil interactedwithhumans, assumed human formand gave birthto human children.Others provideda satireof humanbehaviour,notablyof humanjustice.In any case animalswere neitherinsensatenor lackingin intent,and 82

pp. 331-5. Mengus, Flagellumdaemonum,

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LAW, FOLKLORE AND ANIMAL LORE

37

while judges may have based theirverdictson customarylaw and theexecutionsprobconceptsofuniversaljustice,people witnessing ably saw them as retribution.While this approach was severely criticizedin thethirteenth century,itprevailedoverpowerfulattacks intothescheme mainlybecauseitsnetresult- animaltrials- fitted of universaljusticeas earlymodernintellectuals perceivedit. The survivalofanimaltrials,then,was theresultoftheirsimultaneous dependenceupontwototallydifferent traditions. Popularanthropomorphismand learned ideas of justice met at this juncture. certain Furthermore, theycontinuedto existbecause theyfulfilled necessaryfunctions.While they settledno disputesand kept no peace, they were importantin other ways. They definedman's withtheanimalkingdomby virtueofhis judicialrights relationship over it. They reaffirmed society'sself-imageas universallyjust. Finally,theecclesiasticaltrialsprovidedthe settingfora communal ritualof selfand environment frominimicalforces. purification The interaction betweeneliteand popularperceptionsof animals and justicecan be seen outsidethecourt-houseas well as in it. The transitionof fabulouselementsfromclassical elite cultureto early medievalpopular beliefs,back to the learnedbestiariesand once morevia thecourt-houseand thecock's executionintotherealmof of classingany long-standing peasantideas, showstheimpossibility tradition as eitherlearnedor popular.Once in court,thosetraditions were bound to interact,influenceeach otherand producea hybrid suchas theanimaltrials.In fact,in so faras all legalpractice tradition, is a culturalphenomenon,it is necessarilyan intermediate one. It findsexpressionin the court-house,where abstractand concrete problems,juristsand litigantsconverge.The courtwas a meetinggroundof scholarsand simplefolk,wherelearnedideas came into contactand occasionalconflictwithpopularperceptionsand traditions.One of the resultsof thisencounterwas theanimaltrials. Ben GurionUniversity EstherCohen oftheNegev Beer Sheva

This content downloaded from 192.133.28.4 on Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:02:20 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions