When Animal Trials Were a Thing
Animals that misbehaved could be criminally tried in court in Middle Ages Europe. In 1457, a sow in Savigny, France, with six piglets in tow, attacked and killed a five-year-old. Nowadays, the sow’s owner might face criminal charges for negligence. Medieval Europeans had different notions of law and justice. Savigny’s authorities charged the sow with murder, and brought charges against the piglets as accomplices. A lawyer was appointed to defend the accused, and after testimony was heard, a judge found the porcine guilty. In accordance with local custom, he sentenced her to be hanged to death by her hind legs. If it was any relief to the sow, her execution was not as painful as that of another pig convicted of homicide in Falaise, Normandy, in 1386. It was sentenced not only to hang, but to also be maimed in the head and forelegs before hanging.
Fortunately for the piglets, they did not share their mother’s fate. Although they had been found covered in blood, their participation in the murder was not proven, so they were acquitted. To criminally try animals might seem strange and funny nowadays, because we know they lack the moral agency necessary to make them culpable for crimes. We’re not medieval Europeans, though. Back then, all involved in such trials, judges, lawyers, bailiffs, and hangmen in case the animal was found guilty, took the proceedings quite seriously. The Savigny sow had been imprisoned pending the trial, and the jailer charged the same daily rate for the pig’s board as that of human prisoners. The court hired a professional hangman to carry out the sentence, and he charged the same fees as those charged for the execution of a human.