 First edition title page | |
| Author | John Oswald |
|---|---|
| Illustrator | James Gillray (frontispiece)[1] |
| Language | English |
| Subject | Vegetarianism,animal ethics |
| Genre | Philosophicaltreatise |
| Publisher | J. Johnson |
Publication date | 1791 |
| Publication place | Kingdom of Great Britain |
| Media type | |
| Pages | 156 |
| OCLC | 65318929 |
| Text | The Cry of Nature; or, An Appeal to Mercy and to Justice, on Behalf of the Persecuted Animals atWikisource |
The Cry of Nature; or, An Appeal to Mercy and to Justice, on Behalf of the Persecuted Animals is a 1791 philosophicaltreatise by Scottish writer and revolutionaryJohn Oswald. The work advocatesvegetarianism andethical concern for animals, combiningEnlightenment reasoning with emotional and moral appeals. Written partly as a personal justification of Oswald's lifestyle, it presents historical, religious, physiological, and philosophical arguments against practices such as meat-eating, hunting,vivisection, andanimal sacrifice. Central to the treatise is the idea that animals are moral subjects capable of suffering and deserving of compassion. Oswald rejects human dominion over animals and calls for a return to a simpler, nonviolent way of life grounded in justice, health, and empathy.
John Oswald (c. 1760–1793) was a Scottish poet, soldier, political journalist, and revolutionary active in both Britain and France. After serving in theBritish Army in India, he adoptedvegetarianism and developed critiques of colonialism and social hierarchy. He later became involved in radical political journalism in London and moved to Paris in the early 1790s, where he joined theJacobin Club, participated in theCercle Social. Oswald proposed a universal democratic republic grounded in direct participation and equality, and he helped organise a regiment of volunteer pikemen during theFrench Revolution. He was killed in 1793 duringmilitary action in the Vendée.[2]
Oswald's exposure toHindu vegetarian customs while serving in India significantly shaped his moral perspective and informed the arguments he would later present in his 1791 treatise,The Cry of Nature.[3]
Oswald argues that humans are not naturally carnivorous and that meat-eating is a corruption introduced by custom, priestcraft, and false theology. He maintains that killing animals desensitises people to cruelty and fosters violence. He suggests that if individuals had to personally witness or perform the killing of animals, far fewer would choose to eat meat; however, the division of labour enables people to consume animal products while remaining detached from the ethical implications. Oswald claims that social conditioning dulls natural empathetic responses, allowing cruelty to persist unchallenged. He defends the capacity of animals to feel and express emotions, citing their affection, intelligence, grief, and social behaviour, and asserts that animals were not given to humans for domination, but as objects of compassion, with all beings sharing a common origin under one benevolent cause.
He contrasts Western practices with those ofHindustan, praising Hindu religion and legislation for protecting animals and opposing violence. He states that Hindus see animals as kin, deserving of care, and argues that their mythology and ethics promote mercy. He also praises ancient traditions that avoided bloodshed, including the Pythagoreans and early Christians who abstained from animal flesh.
Oswald supports his arguments with numerous citations. He quotesJuvenal,Virgil,Ovid,Homer,Shakespeare, andThomson to invoke poetic sympathy with animals. He draws extensively onPorphyry'sDe Abstinentia, referencing it to support moral arguments for abstaining from flesh. He citesSt. Augustine'sDe moribus Manichaeorum andDe quantitate animae critically, particularly on the denial of reason and moral status to animals. He referencesPlutarch,Epicurus, and classical legislation, as well as laws attributed toTriptolemus and practices in ancient Greece. Hindu and Buddhist religious views are cited in praise of their nonviolent ethics. Biblical texts are quoted both favourably (e.g.Genesis 1:29) and critically (e.g.Genesis 9) in relation to dietary teachings.
Oswald also refers to modern sources, including physiciansGeorge Cheyne andJohn Arbuthnot, to argue that animal food is unhealthy, putrefactive, and physiologically unsuited to the human constitution. He draws from travel accounts to describe the customs of cultures such as theGuanches,Tartars, andNative Americans, especially where they show compassion or ritual respect for animals.
The book defends the view that humanity's original state was one of peace, agriculture, and vegetarian living. It presents a decline narrative, in which curiosity, scientific pride, and civilisation led to moral decay, bloodshed, and exploitation of animals. Oswald concludes with an emotional appeal for readers to rediscover their innate sympathy, to abandon cruel customs, and to extend moral concern to allsentient beings.
May the benevolent system spread to every corner of the globe; may we learn to recognize and to respect in other animals the feelings which vibrate in ourselves; may we be led to perceive that those cruel repasts are not more injurious to the creatures whom we devour than they are hostile to our health, which delights in innocent simplicity, and destructive of our happiness, which is wounded by every act of violence, while it feeds as it were on the prospect of well-being, and is raised to the highest summit of enjoyment by the sympathetic touch of social satisfaction.
Aaron Garrett describesThe Cry of Nature as a sweeping critique of meat-eating, vivisection, and the scientific and cultural violence inflicted on animals. He explains that Oswald opposes human cruelty and the belief in human superiority, framing them as symptoms of a deeper historical estrangement from both nature and the self. According to Garrett, Oswald's argument draws on a radicalisedRousseauian narrative in which humans originally lived peacefully with animals but became alienated through religious doctrines, custom, and the distancing of violence via delegated killing. He contrasts these developments with non-Western cultures such as those in India, China, and Tibet, which Oswald views as treating animals as respected members of society.[4]
InThe Oxford Handbook of Food Ethics, John Grey and Aaron Garrett interpret the treatise as a synthesis of revolutionary Rousseauian politics and philosophical vegetarianism, influenced by both Western and non-Western thought. While drawing on Rousseau's critique of commercial society, Oswald was also deeply shaped by Indian vegetarianism and religious-philosophical sources including Porphyry, Buddhist and Hindu texts, and the Koran. According to Grey and Garrett, Oswald's central argument is that eating meat and conducting animal experiments estrange humans from their natural sentiments, particularly pity. He contends that the concealment of animal slaughter enables moral detachment and sustains systems of cruelty. By rejecting pity and embracing consumption, humans undermine their own moral and political integrity. Oswald advocated vegetarianism not only as an ethical response to animal suffering but also as a foundation for a more egalitarian and compassionate democratic society.[5]
The anonymous publication ''Remarks on Cruelty to Animals'' (printed byG. Nicholson in 1795), presents a passionate case for vegetarianism, drawing extensively onThe Cry of Nature and a wide array of historical, religious, and scientific sources. The author condemns meat-eating as unnatural, unhealthy, and morally degrading, arguing that the act of killing animals suppresses human compassion and estranges people from their moral instincts. Citing figures such as Porphyry, George Cheyne, Buffon, and the Qur'an, the text frames vegetarianism as a return to a more peaceful and virtuous way of life. It criticises the concealment of animal slaughter and asserts that witnessing animal suffering would discourage consumption. Emphasising both ethical and medical concerns, the tract portrays vegetarianism as promoting health, longevity, and clarity of mind.[6]
InThe Cry of Nature: Art and the Making of Animal Rights (2013),Stephen F. Eisenman uses the concept of the "cry of nature"—drawn from John Oswald's 1791 treatise—as a central theme in exploring how visual art has shaped ideas about animals. According to Eisenman, Oswald's work broke with earlier animal advocacy by rejecting human dominion and calling for a reversal of the species hierarchy, urging that animals be treated as moral subjects. Eisenman traces this idea through artworks from the eighteenth century onward that depict animal suffering and challengeanthropocentric views, contrasting them with what he calls the "pathos formula", where violence is aestheticised. He presents the "cry of nature" as a recurring artistic and ethical motif that questions the treatment and moral status of nonhuman animals.[1]
The book is considered one of the first major works to emerge from eighteenth-century opposition to vivisection and contributed to the foundations of modern vegetarian and humanist thought.[7]
The Cry of Nature was first printed in London in 1791 byJ. Johnson.[8] It was later reprinted in Aaron Garrett'sRights and Souls in the Eighteenth Century.[9]
A new edition, edited by John Hribal with a preface byPeter Linebaugh, was published in 2000 by theEdwin Mellen Press.[10]
Media from Commons
Quotations from Wikiquote
Texts from Wikisource