WEBVTT 1 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.760 About Jeremy Bentham, who was also the subject of another lecture in this series. 2 00:00:05.180 --> 00:00:09.400 Writing at the start of the French Revolution, Jeremy Bentham argued for an end to cruelty 3 00:00:09.400 --> 00:00:10.280 towards animals. 4 00:00:10.960 --> 00:00:15.940 The day may come, he declared, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights 5 00:00:15.940 --> 00:00:19.680 which could never have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. 6 00:00:20.140 --> 00:00:23.820 Bentham's ethics stemmed from his greatest happiness principle. 7 00:00:24.480 --> 00:00:25.860 Pain, he said, was bad. 8 00:00:26.060 --> 00:00:27.060 Pleasure, good. 9 00:00:27.940 --> 00:00:29.120 That's a simple principle. 10 00:00:29.120 --> 00:00:33.820 It followed that the rightness or wrongness of an act stemmed from the degree to which 11 00:00:33.820 --> 00:00:35.240 it caused pleasure or pain. 12 00:00:35.880 --> 00:00:40.840 Now, using this logic, Bentham thought about how the logic of the maximisation of happiness 13 00:00:40.840 --> 00:00:45.340 could extend from colonists to slaves to non-human beings. 14 00:00:45.960 --> 00:00:47.680 He reasoned that, and I quote, 15 00:00:47.860 --> 00:00:51.540 the blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without 16 00:00:51.540 --> 00:00:53.540 redress to the caprice of a tormentor. 17 00:00:53.900 --> 00:00:58.480 It may come one day to be recognised that the number of the legs, the velocity of the 18 00:00:58.480 --> 00:00:58.820 skin, 19 00:00:59.120 --> 00:01:00.420 velocity, not velocity, 20 00:01:00.820 --> 00:01:03.080 or the termination of the os sacrum 21 00:01:03.080 --> 00:01:07.900 are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being to the same fate. 22 00:01:08.220 --> 00:01:13.040 Bentham rejected the ability to reason or to talk as an ethical dividing line between 23 00:01:13.040 --> 00:01:14.600 people and other forms of life. 24 00:01:15.120 --> 00:01:20.260 The question, he concluded, in a passage much quoted by later humanitarians, 25 00:01:20.400 --> 00:01:24.560 is not can they reason, nor can they talk, but can they suffer? 26 00:01:25.020 --> 00:01:29.020 Bentham's philosophy and the 18th and 19th century English humane movement, 27 00:01:29.120 --> 00:01:34.000 in general, treated cruelty to animals as a human wrong, or, from a religious perspective, 28 00:01:34.300 --> 00:01:34.680 a sin. 29 00:01:35.200 --> 00:01:40.420 But some of Bentham's contemporaries advanced to a still more radical position that drew 30 00:01:40.420 --> 00:01:44.720 more explicitly on the French Revolution and sought to attribute rights to animals. 31 00:01:45.480 --> 00:01:51.120 John Lawrence, for example, wrote a philosophical treatise on horses and on the moral duties 32 00:01:51.120 --> 00:01:54.080 of man towards the brute creation in 1796. 33 00:01:54.760 --> 00:01:59.100 In a chapter entitled On the Rights of Beasts, Lawrence examined the 34 00:01:59.120 --> 00:02:03.280 reason for the barbarous, unfeeling and capricious conduct of man to brute creation. 35 00:02:03.740 --> 00:02:08.940 The problem, he wrote in a nutshell, was that animals were utterly devoid of rights and placed 36 00:02:08.940 --> 00:02:10.260 without the pall of justice. 37 00:02:11.380 --> 00:02:15.900 Lawrence rejected this idea and the Cartesian view that animals were merely for the use 38 00:02:15.900 --> 00:02:16.960 and purposes of man. 39 00:02:17.880 --> 00:02:22.520 Drawing on the principles of natural law, he argued that life, intelligence and feeling 40 00:02:23.180 --> 00:02:24.760 necessarily imply rights. 41 00:02:25.900 --> 00:02:28.600 What he meant was that animals were, in these respects, 42 00:02:29.120 --> 00:02:32.340 like people and that the essence of justice was not divisible. 43 00:02:33.420 --> 00:02:38.960 Well, of course, contemporary discussions about the moral and juridical place of animals 44 00:02:38.960 --> 00:02:44.480 in our society are but footnotes to the intellectual progression that were made during the 18th 45 00:02:44.480 --> 00:02:44.840 century. 46 00:02:45.120 --> 00:02:46.380 This was a key period. 47 00:02:46.640 --> 00:02:51.320 During this session, we will hear three diverse perspectives, each of which teaches us something 48 00:02:51.320 --> 00:02:56.780 about our relationship with animals and their evolving role in human society, particularly 49 00:02:57.860 --> 00:02:59.100 their legal and social life. 50 00:02:59.120 --> 00:03:01.840 So, I'll introduce our three speakers. 51 00:03:02.340 --> 00:03:07.220 From your right, Dr. Amy Milker, who is a research fellow in the Australian Research 52 00:03:07.220 --> 00:03:13.780 Council, funded Centre for the History of Emotions at the University of Adelaide. 53 00:03:14.320 --> 00:03:20.220 In the centre, Pierre Cernat, who is Professor of History at the University of Paris, Sorbonne 54 00:03:20.220 --> 00:03:24.180 at Panthéon, where he was Director of the Institute for the History of the French Revolution. 55 00:03:24.800 --> 00:03:28.400 And on your left, Nick Fletcher, who is the Head of the Military, 56 00:03:29.120 --> 00:03:32.500 Realtory and Technology at the Australian War Memorial, Canberra. 57 00:03:32.580 --> 00:03:34.480 Would you join me in welcoming our three speakers? 58 00:03:34.660 --> 00:03:36.420 And I'll invite Amy to come up. 59 00:03:36.540 --> 00:03:41.180 The debate about how to regulate animal ownership is centuries old, and it's fraught with both 60 00:03:41.180 --> 00:03:42.960 practical and ethical difficulties. 61 00:03:43.460 --> 00:03:47.820 This is especially true in the case of the dog, whose privileged status as man's best 62 00:03:47.820 --> 00:03:51.440 friend might lead us to feel like he should be accorded special rights. 63 00:03:52.280 --> 00:03:57.820 My research focuses on the status of the dog in late 18th century England, and today I'm 64 00:03:57.820 --> 00:03:59.100 going to talk to you about how to regulate animal ownership. 65 00:03:59.100 --> 00:04:04.140 In 1796, a seemingly straightforward tax on the ownership of dogs led to people considering 66 00:04:04.140 --> 00:04:06.480 animal rights and the rights of humans too. 67 00:04:06.960 --> 00:04:10.820 So in 1796, the English Parliament met to consider a tax on dogs. 68 00:04:11.360 --> 00:04:17.020 The bill was one of numerous proposed taxes on luxuries, such as hair powder for wigs, 69 00:04:17.100 --> 00:04:18.940 windows, saddles and port. 70 00:04:19.400 --> 00:04:23.140 The revenue from these taxes was needed to fund a war with revolutionary France, which 71 00:04:23.140 --> 00:04:24.980 by this point had been going on for several years. 72 00:04:25.340 --> 00:04:29.020 But a dog tax was considered necessary for a variety of other reasons. 73 00:04:29.020 --> 00:04:33.720 First, there was the problem of dogs who ran wild, killing livestock and having dramatic 74 00:04:33.720 --> 00:04:35.840 effect on the livelihood of small tenant farmers. 75 00:04:36.680 --> 00:04:40.440 Secondly, popular concern about the spread of rabies meant that loose dogs were a cause 76 00:04:40.440 --> 00:04:41.640 for serious public concern. 77 00:04:42.240 --> 00:04:46.520 Third and more contentious were suggestions about who should be allowed to keep dogs in 78 00:04:46.520 --> 00:04:47.180 the first place. 79 00:04:47.900 --> 00:04:53.280 In a time of failed harvests and food scarcity, the rich were buying up cheap meat to feed 80 00:04:53.280 --> 00:04:58.820 their lap dogs and their packs of hounds, meaning that the poor struggled to buy provisions 81 00:04:59.020 --> 00:04:59.580 for their families. 82 00:05:00.560 --> 00:05:04.520 One MP suggested that the revenue from the dog tax should go towards the poor rates to 83 00:05:04.520 --> 00:05:05.740 kind of offset this issue. 84 00:05:06.620 --> 00:05:10.960 But the argument in Parliament continued and another member of Parliament suggested that 85 00:05:10.960 --> 00:05:15.560 the poor shouldn't be allowed to keep dogs at all if they were struggling to put food 86 00:05:15.560 --> 00:05:16.620 on the table for their families. 87 00:05:16.860 --> 00:05:21.520 It was irresponsible to maintain a pet room once children were starving, and a tax would 88 00:05:21.520 --> 00:05:24.380 mean that poor people would give up their nuisance dogs rather than pay. 89 00:05:25.760 --> 00:05:29.000 Now these considerations raise a number of questions about the situation. 90 00:05:29.000 --> 00:05:31.080 First, what was the status of the animal in 18th century society? 91 00:05:32.140 --> 00:05:37.900 Was the dog an object, a possession, a luxury, a thing which could be treated or destroyed 92 00:05:37.900 --> 00:05:39.580 in any way that the owner saw fit? 93 00:05:40.720 --> 00:05:45.660 When a dog committed a crime or caused damage, who was responsible, the animal or the owner? 94 00:05:47.280 --> 00:05:51.340 Could the importance of the dog to its owner be quantified in shillings and pence, or did 95 00:05:51.340 --> 00:05:55.440 animals contribute to humans' emotional and physical well-being in other ways? 96 00:05:57.000 --> 00:05:58.980 And finally, and inevitably, the issue of the dog's own value. 97 00:05:59.000 --> 00:06:03.460 The imposition of this tax would mean that untaxed animals would be killed by their owners, 98 00:06:03.520 --> 00:06:04.960 all rounded up and culled. 99 00:06:04.960 --> 00:06:09.640 This presented another set of problems relating to public order, violence and cruelty. 100 00:06:10.320 --> 00:06:13.700 Now many people assume that animal cruelty was just a fact of life in the past. 101 00:06:14.320 --> 00:06:19.160 It's true that cruel sports and entertainment such as bear-baiting and cock-fighting were 102 00:06:19.160 --> 00:06:21.540 common among other forms of mistreatment. 103 00:06:22.740 --> 00:06:28.440 During the 18th century, however, many people voiced concern about animal cruelty, but it 104 00:06:28.440 --> 00:06:32.360 seems that they were more worried about its impact on human morality than they were about 105 00:06:32.360 --> 00:06:33.200 suffering animals. 106 00:06:34.040 --> 00:06:39.080 It was commonly held that cruelty to animals demonstrated a lack of self-control which 107 00:06:39.080 --> 00:06:41.520 might lead to greater and more serious crimes. 108 00:06:42.180 --> 00:06:48.720 Here you see William Hogarth's famous Four Stages of Cruelty from 1751, in which the 109 00:06:48.720 --> 00:06:53.620 fictional character Tom Nero in Plate 1 is shown as a young boy torturing animals for 110 00:06:53.620 --> 00:06:53.860 fun. 111 00:06:55.180 --> 00:06:58.120 In the second engraving, Tom has grown up and become a coachman. 112 00:06:58.440 --> 00:07:02.460 He is shown beating his horse, which has collapsed due to exhaustion and overwork. 113 00:07:04.000 --> 00:07:09.780 In the third and fourth stages, Tom graduates to murder, killing a young woman and being 114 00:07:09.780 --> 00:07:11.920 executed and dissected for his crime. 115 00:07:12.540 --> 00:07:16.580 You may notice the what goes around comes around message in the bottom corner here, 116 00:07:16.580 --> 00:07:19.980 the dog is eating the dissected criminals entrails. 117 00:07:23.760 --> 00:07:25.600 The message here was clear. 118 00:07:25.840 --> 00:07:28.420 Animal cruelty was an indicator of immoral cruelty. 119 00:07:28.420 --> 00:07:31.480 It was a sign of moral or spiritual failing which would lead to greater crimes if left 120 00:07:31.480 --> 00:07:32.220 unchecked. 121 00:07:32.240 --> 00:07:40.260 We can see why in 1796 the prospect of a cull on untaxed dogs would have worried the Parliament 122 00:07:40.260 --> 00:07:42.460 and commentators on the tax. 123 00:07:42.740 --> 00:07:46.640 If people became more accustomed to violence against animals, they might become open to 124 00:07:46.640 --> 00:07:51.300 attacks on each other or even worse on their social superiors, mirroring events in France. 125 00:07:53.040 --> 00:07:57.240 The political concerns associated with the tax were made clear in a number of grisly 126 00:07:57.240 --> 00:07:58.400 caricatures which show the effect of the tax on animals. 127 00:07:58.400 --> 00:08:02.440 They were to show prominent politicians as untaxed dogs ready to meet their end. 128 00:08:02.860 --> 00:08:09.280 What is interesting is that these images exist on both sides of the political spectrum. 129 00:08:09.600 --> 00:08:14.360 On your left is the Prime Minister William Pitt being hung up as an untaxed dog with 130 00:08:14.360 --> 00:08:17.000 the taxes on brandy and port attached to his legs. 131 00:08:17.260 --> 00:08:21.440 Whereas on the right is the Whig opposition politician and dissenter Charles James Fox 132 00:08:21.440 --> 00:08:25.720 who is associated with the French Revolution and is being hung up by the good dogs who 133 00:08:25.720 --> 00:08:26.840 have been paid for by the king. 134 00:08:27.220 --> 00:08:27.700 .. 135 00:08:28.400 --> 00:08:33.900 swung both ways and it was very common in 1796 to see these images around London. The dog tax was 136 00:08:33.900 --> 00:08:37.780 met with opposition from a variety of people who resented attacks on their property and their 137 00:08:37.780 --> 00:08:43.760 autonomy. To them dogs weren't simply possessions, they performed important services like leading the 138 00:08:43.760 --> 00:08:48.800 blind, guarding sheep and protecting the home. They contributed to their owner's well-being, providing 139 00:08:48.800 --> 00:08:55.340 comfort and companionship and they demonstrated distinct personalities and emotions. These 140 00:08:55.340 --> 00:08:59.340 arguments departed from long-held beliefs that animals weren't sentient beings and they couldn't 141 00:08:59.340 --> 00:09:04.780 feel pain. Increasingly scientists and philosophers recognised the strong resemblance between human 142 00:09:04.780 --> 00:09:10.380 and animal anatomy and argued that animals could think, feel and reason in ways which were similar 143 00:09:10.380 --> 00:09:16.280 to humans. The discussion over the dog tax then, as I've started to show you, had dangerous political 144 00:09:16.280 --> 00:09:23.500 potential. In newspapers, pamphlets, poems and pictures, opponents of the dog tax adopted a new 145 00:09:23.500 --> 00:09:24.740 rights-based language. 146 00:09:27.080 --> 00:09:32.880 In England, Thomas Paine's Rights of Man communicated radical messages about reform and universal 147 00:09:32.880 --> 00:09:37.920 rights in simple language. This paved the way for a discussion about the rights of working-class 148 00:09:37.920 --> 00:09:44.660 men, women, servants, slaves and even animals. Some argued that animals like children or 149 00:09:44.660 --> 00:09:49.460 invalids had the right to protection regardless of their ability to reason or express their 150 00:09:49.460 --> 00:09:54.580 needs. Perhaps they also had the right to liberty, to legal protection and to representation. 151 00:09:54.720 --> 00:09:55.320 In the 19th century, the British government was able to use the right to protection to 152 00:09:55.320 --> 00:09:59.980 defend dogs. Far from being viewed as objects, dogs were personified and given voices in the dog tax 153 00:09:59.980 --> 00:10:04.880 debate, transforming them into persons with rights to defend. You can see that personification here in the 154 00:10:04.880 --> 00:10:09.840 petitions from dogs to parliament which are being publicised in the newspapers. It's not people speaking on 155 00:10:09.840 --> 00:10:16.760 behalf of dogs, but the dogs advocating for themselves. In these publications, dogs presented themselves as 156 00:10:16.760 --> 00:10:23.360 legal subjects with the ability to reason, moralise and make their complaints heard. Even the bite of a 157 00:10:23.360 --> 00:10:25.300 rabid dog was transformed into a legal subject. 158 00:10:27.520 --> 00:10:35.720 Dogs feel and resent their injuries with more spirit than Englishmen, one paper claimed. The dogs wished revenge on the people for taxing them. 159 00:10:37.140 --> 00:10:44.960 Presenting animals as more politically informed and active than their owners was meant to shame humans into action and political engagement. 160 00:10:45.480 --> 00:10:50.920 Historians of animal rights tend to explain the improving treatment of animals as part of a trickle-down effect. 161 00:10:51.220 --> 00:10:53.880 You can see down the hierarchy here. 162 00:10:54.320 --> 00:10:55.120 Arguing that the 163 00:10:55.300 --> 00:11:00.840 extension of rights and liberties to subordinated people led gradually to a consideration of other creatures. 164 00:11:01.820 --> 00:11:13.140 But in 1796 with this dog tax, something quite different was happening. Using the language of rights to defend dogs and oppose taxation highlighted inequalities in the treatment of humans. 165 00:11:13.860 --> 00:11:20.920 As the historian David Perkins explains, animals could not be granted rights which were denied to subordinate classes of humans. 166 00:11:22.400 --> 00:11:25.280 If animals were capable not only of feeling pain and of loss but also of being abused, they would be able to be treated as a human. 167 00:11:25.280 --> 00:11:27.200 This reason for reason 168 00:11:27.200 --> 00:11:29.440 This reason for reason reason reason 169 00:11:32.120 --> 00:11:34.140 This reason for reason reason reason 170 00:11:34.140 --> 00:11:36.760 This reason for reason reason 171 00:11:37.880 --> 00:11:40.340 This reason for reason reason 172 00:11:40.940 --> 00:11:41.600 This reason for reason reason 173 00:11:41.600 --> 00:11:42.120 This reason for reason reason 174 00:11:42.120 --> 00:11:42.260 This reason for reason reason 175 00:11:42.260 --> 00:11:42.580 This reason for reason reason 176 00:11:42.580 --> 00:11:42.660 This reason for reason reason 177 00:11:42.660 --> 00:11:42.720 This reason for reason reason 178 00:11:42.720 --> 00:11:43.900 This reason for reason reason 179 00:11:43.900 --> 00:11:44.260 This reason for reason reason 180 00:11:44.260 --> 00:11:44.320 This reason for reason reason 181 00:11:44.320 --> 00:11:44.340 This reason for reason reason 182 00:11:44.340 --> 00:11:44.480 This reason for reason reason 183 00:11:44.480 --> 00:11:45.680 This reason for reason reason 184 00:11:45.680 --> 00:11:46.900 This reason for reason reason 185 00:11:46.900 --> 00:11:47.260 This reason for reason reason 186 00:11:47.260 --> 00:11:48.520 This reason for reason reason 187 00:11:48.520 --> 00:11:49.180 This reason for reason reason 188 00:11:49.180 --> 00:11:51.360 This reason for reason reason 189 00:11:51.360 --> 00:11:52.820 This reason for reason reason 190 00:11:52.820 --> 00:11:53.180 This reason for reason reason 191 00:11:55.460 --> 00:12:03.160 Clearly, animals weren't just objects to be taxed, but living creatures who might have the same rights as their owners. 192 00:12:03.460 --> 00:12:04.120 Thank you. 193 00:12:04.720 --> 00:12:05.900 Thanks to be here. 194 00:12:06.240 --> 00:12:09.380 So I'm going to present you my work. 195 00:12:10.220 --> 00:12:12.620 Do animals have rights during the French Revolution? 196 00:12:13.020 --> 00:12:19.620 What did the revolution do for animals and what did animals do also for a revolution? 197 00:12:19.740 --> 00:12:22.740 Is it a good question or a foolish question? 198 00:12:22.960 --> 00:12:24.660 I think that it's a good question. 199 00:12:25.460 --> 00:12:41.460 First, I want to remind that the revolution built like a utopia, a dream, changing all the social order, all the political order, all the economical order of the society. 200 00:12:41.960 --> 00:12:53.640 So, of course, the Declaration of Rights of Men and Citizens in August 1789, since that, as you can say, as you can hear, 201 00:12:53.800 --> 00:12:54.880 the first world war. 202 00:12:55.280 --> 00:12:57.600 And then he became a citizen. 203 00:12:57.880 --> 00:13:00.240 But this man was not only a human. 204 00:13:00.440 --> 00:13:05.060 He was a natural man, a natural being. 205 00:13:05.220 --> 00:13:11.120 That means that he arrived after the big fight of the Enlightenment philosophy, 206 00:13:12.260 --> 00:13:16.660 who pretends to defend against the clergy, above all in France, 207 00:13:16.920 --> 00:13:23.960 that men were superior animals before them being divine creatures. 208 00:13:24.400 --> 00:13:24.920 So, 209 00:13:25.280 --> 00:13:53.040 he gotta 210 00:13:53.040 --> 00:13:59.900 a very famous writer who began his history being director of the first menagerie in Paris, 211 00:14:00.900 --> 00:14:08.060 in fact, described the possibility of the revolution transformation of the society 212 00:14:08.060 --> 00:14:12.500 with this couple of animals very famous during the revolution. 213 00:14:12.860 --> 00:14:15.540 I present you two beings very interesting, 214 00:14:15.860 --> 00:14:19.640 Voira, the lion arriving from Senegal, 215 00:14:19.640 --> 00:14:25.040 and the dog Hercule, who was a very close friend of this lion. 216 00:14:25.200 --> 00:14:29.460 It's not a metaphor, it's not a legend, it's not a dream. 217 00:14:29.800 --> 00:14:33.420 This couple has really existed during the French Revolution. 218 00:14:33.840 --> 00:14:38.040 And for the revolutionary, who were the scientists, very important, 219 00:14:38.760 --> 00:14:43.360 because natural science were at the level, 220 00:14:43.440 --> 00:14:48.780 at the ground level of the construction of the knowledge, of the republican knowledge, 221 00:14:49.640 --> 00:14:54.960 of course, this couple could demonstrate that even the wild animals, 222 00:14:55.140 --> 00:14:57.940 even the beasts, even the ferocious animals, 223 00:14:58.200 --> 00:15:05.360 could be civilized, could be more calm with the presence of the dog. 224 00:15:05.520 --> 00:15:08.300 Here also, on the other side of the channel, 225 00:15:08.480 --> 00:15:14.080 you see the political importance of the dog, of course. 226 00:15:14.400 --> 00:15:19.420 So this was a real show, and reprinted by... 227 00:15:19.640 --> 00:15:23.300 hundreds and thousands of times to show to Parisian people, 228 00:15:23.520 --> 00:15:26.600 and also French people to other provinces, 229 00:15:26.840 --> 00:15:31.660 that it was possible to invent a new thought of friendship. 230 00:15:32.360 --> 00:15:37.380 And here you have the demonstration with the plan of the garden of plants, 231 00:15:37.520 --> 00:15:39.760 who exists yet in Paris. 232 00:15:40.360 --> 00:15:43.200 In the first part, in the first part here, 233 00:15:43.460 --> 00:15:49.620 you have the old garden, the wild garden of plants, 234 00:15:49.640 --> 00:15:54.180 of vegetables, and here you have the new garden, 235 00:15:54.320 --> 00:15:56.200 the new garden of animals. 236 00:15:56.680 --> 00:15:59.780 And you have a republican walk, 237 00:16:00.640 --> 00:16:04.020 which is proposed to the inhabitants of Paris, and also tourists, 238 00:16:04.320 --> 00:16:06.740 when France will be at peace, 239 00:16:07.020 --> 00:16:10.500 not during the revolutionary wars, evidently, 240 00:16:10.540 --> 00:16:19.620 where people can discover all the animals of the reign of the natural world, 241 00:16:19.640 --> 00:16:20.880 of the reign of the nature. 242 00:16:21.080 --> 00:16:24.460 Here you have the qualms, youthful animals, 243 00:16:25.640 --> 00:16:28.800 who are quite free, like in a park today, 244 00:16:29.060 --> 00:16:33.060 like the park I visited yesterday, near Adelaide. 245 00:16:33.360 --> 00:16:36.020 It was the same conception. 246 00:16:36.420 --> 00:16:41.040 To be free, if the citizens are free, animals have to be free. 247 00:16:41.500 --> 00:16:46.060 And how are we going to deal with ferocious animals here, 248 00:16:46.200 --> 00:16:48.400 in this part of the garden? 249 00:16:48.400 --> 00:16:52.380 Well, it was easy, because lions, because tigers, 250 00:16:52.560 --> 00:16:56.140 because all these kinds of dangerous animals, 251 00:16:56.460 --> 00:17:01.760 were also animals chosen to symbolize noble qualities. 252 00:17:02.260 --> 00:17:07.680 So for that moment, France was at war against the nobles, 253 00:17:07.720 --> 00:17:10.320 against the kings, so it was easy to explain 254 00:17:10.320 --> 00:17:14.940 for what reason these kinds of animals were in cages. 255 00:17:16.180 --> 00:17:17.640 They were not... 256 00:17:17.640 --> 00:17:18.320 Yes. 257 00:17:18.400 --> 00:17:19.340 They were not yet republicans. 258 00:17:19.640 --> 00:17:21.720 Anyway, furthermore, better said, 259 00:17:21.940 --> 00:17:25.700 it was a real wish to the republican scientists 260 00:17:25.700 --> 00:17:31.620 to invent the capacity to make reproduction in this menagerie. 261 00:17:31.780 --> 00:17:34.780 You know that also today it's very difficult to make 262 00:17:34.780 --> 00:17:38.380 that wild animals can reproduce themselves 263 00:17:38.380 --> 00:17:41.320 in a condition of servitude. 264 00:17:41.640 --> 00:17:47.160 And in 1801, so finally, a couple of lions, 265 00:17:47.160 --> 00:17:51.780 I present you the male Marco and the female Constantine, 266 00:17:52.080 --> 00:17:56.320 had three little lions, and it was a real republican victory, 267 00:17:56.500 --> 00:17:58.840 because in front of Paris, London, 268 00:17:59.160 --> 00:18:04.520 had never could to make a couple of lions be fertile. 269 00:18:04.760 --> 00:18:08.000 So it was a very strong republican victory. 270 00:18:08.460 --> 00:18:12.840 But I want also to discuss about this kind of pictures. 271 00:18:12.960 --> 00:18:15.040 As you can see, it's quite normal. 272 00:18:15.040 --> 00:18:17.440 In fact, it's not so quite normal, 273 00:18:17.540 --> 00:18:21.180 because the French Revolution invented a new agriculture. 274 00:18:21.780 --> 00:18:25.200 And you have in this picture, wonderful picture, 275 00:18:26.380 --> 00:18:30.820 made by Vincent, close friend and rival to David, 276 00:18:31.080 --> 00:18:35.180 and he paints this in 1798 in the new republic, 277 00:18:35.360 --> 00:18:38.440 the new bourgeois republic, as we say as historians, 278 00:18:38.780 --> 00:18:41.600 because the property was founded, 279 00:18:42.580 --> 00:18:44.180 was a real... 280 00:18:44.180 --> 00:18:48.400 which was real importance now in France 281 00:18:48.400 --> 00:18:49.920 to make the new hierarchy. 282 00:18:50.600 --> 00:18:54.600 You have four couples in this painting. 283 00:18:54.840 --> 00:18:58.340 Well, the man and his wife, 284 00:18:58.640 --> 00:19:02.180 they are the owners of the land. 285 00:19:02.980 --> 00:19:05.860 You have the young people, the sons, 286 00:19:06.120 --> 00:19:09.220 the elder is by force a boy, 287 00:19:09.340 --> 00:19:11.100 and the young daughter. 288 00:19:11.420 --> 00:19:13.820 So you have a third couple 289 00:19:13.820 --> 00:19:15.800 with the peasants, the strong peasants, 290 00:19:15.880 --> 00:19:18.520 who give a lesson to the young bourgeois, 291 00:19:18.840 --> 00:19:22.980 demonstrating that the labor and work of the soil 292 00:19:22.980 --> 00:19:26.080 was the thing most important in France, 293 00:19:26.200 --> 00:19:28.620 and France became a rural country 294 00:19:29.740 --> 00:19:33.340 from this moment to the end of the Second World War. 295 00:19:33.600 --> 00:19:36.960 And you have the fourth couple with the two cows, 296 00:19:37.200 --> 00:19:39.140 which are very important, 297 00:19:39.220 --> 00:19:40.880 because they are the economic motors. 298 00:19:41.140 --> 00:19:43.800 They are the real rich people, 299 00:19:43.800 --> 00:19:46.040 the real rich people of this image 300 00:19:46.040 --> 00:19:48.500 and of this new economy. 301 00:19:48.880 --> 00:19:51.600 So, by this moment, 302 00:19:51.720 --> 00:19:53.420 by this moment, of course, 303 00:19:53.540 --> 00:19:56.200 all the question of agriculture 304 00:19:56.800 --> 00:19:58.940 put in the center the question of the animal 305 00:19:58.940 --> 00:20:02.220 and the place of the animal in the France economy. 306 00:20:02.620 --> 00:20:06.500 Here you have another kind of English caricature 307 00:20:06.500 --> 00:20:08.420 who demonstrate John Bull, 308 00:20:08.720 --> 00:20:10.200 the English man, 309 00:20:10.820 --> 00:20:12.800 who eats a very strong beefsteak, 310 00:20:13.800 --> 00:20:16.300 so all the English men and English women 311 00:20:16.300 --> 00:20:18.820 were not vegetarian at this moment, 312 00:20:19.120 --> 00:20:20.280 as you can see. 313 00:20:20.420 --> 00:20:22.580 And you see the freedom of France 314 00:20:23.320 --> 00:20:27.720 mocking by being vegetarian by force, 315 00:20:27.920 --> 00:20:30.000 because it's not that the revolutionary 316 00:20:30.000 --> 00:20:31.120 wants to be vegetarian, 317 00:20:31.800 --> 00:20:33.960 but as the French people were poor 318 00:20:35.240 --> 00:20:36.480 during the revolution, 319 00:20:36.860 --> 00:20:39.840 they were obliged to eat some grass 320 00:20:39.840 --> 00:20:41.660 or some vegetable. 321 00:20:41.660 --> 00:20:45.420 So it was a point of view 322 00:20:45.420 --> 00:20:49.140 that demonstrate that to be rich country 323 00:20:49.140 --> 00:20:51.880 was to be able to have meat 324 00:20:51.880 --> 00:20:56.040 and to eat some kind of meat. 325 00:20:56.380 --> 00:20:59.660 I want to finish my very short introduction 326 00:21:00.180 --> 00:21:03.240 speaking to you about competition of dissertation 327 00:21:04.020 --> 00:21:06.940 who arrived in 1802. 328 00:21:07.020 --> 00:21:08.640 The Institute of France, 329 00:21:08.780 --> 00:21:10.280 who exists still now, 330 00:21:10.280 --> 00:21:12.460 who have impressed during the revolution 331 00:21:12.460 --> 00:21:14.020 the Académie des Sciences, 332 00:21:14.340 --> 00:21:17.340 proposed a new competition 333 00:21:18.280 --> 00:21:19.340 with two questions. 334 00:21:19.780 --> 00:21:21.480 And we are going to see 335 00:21:22.280 --> 00:21:24.500 as important was the discussion 336 00:21:24.500 --> 00:21:27.260 with the discussion of Hammeh 337 00:21:27.260 --> 00:21:30.080 because make a convergence 338 00:21:30.080 --> 00:21:32.640 with English interregulation. 339 00:21:32.980 --> 00:21:33.720 First question, 340 00:21:33.900 --> 00:21:37.120 in what condition bad treatments against animals 341 00:21:37.120 --> 00:21:39.800 create public disorder? 342 00:21:40.280 --> 00:21:42.260 So it was the first consciousness 343 00:21:42.260 --> 00:21:45.060 that public bad treatment 344 00:21:45.060 --> 00:21:47.060 was not good for morality 345 00:21:47.060 --> 00:21:49.580 of the new citizens of the new republic. 346 00:21:49.860 --> 00:21:50.660 Second question, 347 00:21:50.900 --> 00:21:54.800 is it necessary to write a new law 348 00:21:54.800 --> 00:21:56.540 to protect the animals? 349 00:21:56.920 --> 00:21:58.800 And I have this chance 350 00:21:58.800 --> 00:22:02.140 to write a book regarding this competition. 351 00:22:02.680 --> 00:22:03.840 His name is 352 00:22:03.840 --> 00:22:04.920 L'Animal en République, 353 00:22:05.260 --> 00:22:06.800 The Animal in the Republic, 354 00:22:07.180 --> 00:22:10.260 because these 17 dissertations, 355 00:22:10.280 --> 00:22:11.400 very long, 356 00:22:11.560 --> 00:22:14.840 more than 100 pages each one, 357 00:22:15.580 --> 00:22:17.380 demonstrate that in fact 358 00:22:17.380 --> 00:22:18.720 animals have, 359 00:22:18.880 --> 00:22:19.860 as human beings, 360 00:22:20.120 --> 00:22:21.420 a strong sensibility. 361 00:22:21.880 --> 00:22:24.420 It was the end of the Cartesian paradigm 362 00:22:24.420 --> 00:22:25.920 in the French philosophy. 363 00:22:26.240 --> 00:22:27.920 You know that Rene Descartes 364 00:22:27.920 --> 00:22:28.920 in the 17th century 365 00:22:28.920 --> 00:22:30.740 explains that animals 366 00:22:30.740 --> 00:22:32.920 were not sensitive beings, 367 00:22:33.180 --> 00:22:34.440 they are only machines, 368 00:22:34.780 --> 00:22:35.720 perfect machines. 369 00:22:36.060 --> 00:22:37.360 So you can beat an animal, 370 00:22:37.580 --> 00:22:38.640 you can hurt an animal, 371 00:22:38.820 --> 00:22:39.820 you can injure an animal, 372 00:22:39.820 --> 00:22:41.120 when he cries, 373 00:22:41.340 --> 00:22:43.640 that doesn't mean that he is sensible, 374 00:22:43.940 --> 00:22:46.500 that just explains 375 00:22:46.500 --> 00:22:47.960 that he is a good machine. 376 00:22:48.460 --> 00:22:49.920 But there is a radical change 377 00:22:49.920 --> 00:22:51.040 during the Enlightenment, 378 00:22:51.820 --> 00:22:53.360 and in France also, 379 00:22:53.620 --> 00:22:55.560 the sensitivity of animals 380 00:22:55.560 --> 00:22:57.680 became a real discussion 381 00:22:57.680 --> 00:22:59.200 and a real debate. 382 00:22:59.520 --> 00:23:00.900 So it was the first argument. 383 00:23:01.220 --> 00:23:02.360 The second argument, 384 00:23:02.500 --> 00:23:03.260 the most developed 385 00:23:03.260 --> 00:23:04.440 in this dissertation, 386 00:23:04.940 --> 00:23:06.760 I have to close now, 387 00:23:07.000 --> 00:23:09.420 was in fact 388 00:23:09.420 --> 00:23:10.940 the sensitivity with India. 389 00:23:11.220 --> 00:23:12.460 France discovers 390 00:23:12.460 --> 00:23:15.020 a rich civilization of India 391 00:23:15.020 --> 00:23:16.280 at this moment, 392 00:23:16.500 --> 00:23:18.020 and it was very important 393 00:23:18.020 --> 00:23:19.180 to remark that 394 00:23:19.180 --> 00:23:21.140 a vegetarian civilization 395 00:23:21.140 --> 00:23:24.120 can produce a so rich, 396 00:23:24.300 --> 00:23:25.880 a so important civilization, 397 00:23:25.960 --> 00:23:27.620 and the conclusion was 398 00:23:27.620 --> 00:23:28.960 that it was not necessary 399 00:23:28.960 --> 00:23:30.320 to eat meat, 400 00:23:30.440 --> 00:23:31.680 to be so strong, 401 00:23:31.760 --> 00:23:33.540