This blog post examines the background and legal logic behind animal trials actually conducted in medieval Europe. It explores how the combination of an anthropocentric view of nature with religion and jurisprudence enabled these bizarre trials.
In 1587, residents of a French village sued a swarm of beetles before the local ecclesiastical court, claiming the insects had caused such severe damage that their vineyards were ruined. The villagers’ lawyer cited the Bible, arguing that humans possess the right to dominate nature, and that nature exists solely to serve and obey humans. In response, the court-appointed lawyer for the beetles argued that God commanded all animals to reproduce and survive, and that the beetles were merely exercising their rights under natural law. Ultimately, the residents acknowledged the beetles’ rights but agreed to provide an alternative habitat, concluding with a kind of contract with the beetles.
At that time in Europe, it was not uncommon for animals to be tried by ecclesiastical authorities or secular powers like kings or lords. Animals brought before secular courts as defendants were primarily livestock that had killed people; pigs were the most common, though cows, horses, and dogs also stood trial. In contrast, church trials often involved small animals or insects accused of harming humans. These trials strictly followed the legal procedures applied to humans. If found guilty, secular courts sentenced them to death according to customary law, while ecclesiastical courts imposed curses and excommunication under canon law.
The practice of animal trials began in earnest in the 13th century and reached its peak in the 16th century. During this period in Europe, based on the achievements of ancient Roman jurisprudence, legal studies developed in both secular and ecclesiastical spheres, laying the foundations for modern law. Yet, how could practices that may seem irrational today persist amidst such epochal change? Some attribute this to living conditions where human-animal conflicts were frequent or to folk culture that anthropomorphized animals. However, a more significant point is that the clergy and secular elites of the time actively supported this practice both theoretically and practically.
Animal trials occurred under a new judicial system after the 13th century, where the role and authority of public power had strengthened. The early medieval court system was essentially limited to formally incorporating individuals’ self-help remedies within the framework of a trial. The distinction between civil and criminal cases was ambiguous, and a public penal system was absent. However, under the new court system, courts determined the facts of cases and issued judgments according to rational rules of procedure. Consequently, public authority gained the capacity to handle lawsuits against animals.
Elites advocating animal trials justified them by citing biblical examples like the curse on the serpent or Moses’ law mandating stoning of an ox that gored a man to death. These precedents served as powerful grounds to counter legal critiques of the animal trial practices conducted by secular and ecclesiastical courts. Furthermore, Christian natural law theory, which views all creatures living according to God-given natures within a hierarchical order with humans at the apex, also provided a theoretical foundation. The cosmic legal order consists of the eternal law understood as divine providence, the universal and immutable natural law grasped by human reason, and the positive law enacted by humans. Humans and nature are bound by natural law, and positive law contrary to natural law has no legal effect. Within this framework, debates like the earlier weevil case became possible, and the logic that animals violating the natural order of things could be considered criminals and punished also held ground. From the elite’s perspective, animal trials were solemn procedures to make animals submit to the eternal law and natural law. Through these trials, they sought to apply their concepts of law and justice not only to human society but to the entire natural world. In this sense, animal trials exemplified how the anthropocentric legal concept that emerged after the 13th century came to dominate nature. In this way, animal trials, under the auspices of the elite, interacted with popular culture, producing scenes that appear bizarre to modern eyes.
To understand the significance animal trials held in that era, it is also necessary to focus on the cultural performance function they performed. Phenomena like a pig biting a child to death or a rooster laying an egg caused profound shock and anxiety among people at the time. Faced with such events, animal trials constructed narratives explaining the situation through legal procedures leading to verdicts. By punishing animals that had ‘departed from their nature,’ they enabled people to overcome confusion and return to daily life. Through this, people could repeatedly confirm that their world and its order were safe and legitimate.
