Looking at Animals in Human History (review)

Within the last decade or so, animals have emerged as a focus of research across the humanities and social sciences. The resulting scholarship is sometimes grouped under the rubric of “animal studies,” although its authors share no common methodology or core expertise, and diverge still more widely in their cultural, political, and ethical commitments. Even the meaning of the term animal is open to debate. On a more practical level, this disciplinary range has meant that publications are scattered throughout a wide range of academic journals. In her ambitious survey, Kalof has attempted to digest and organize the work of this burgeoning field.

As the title indicates, the main organizing principle of Looking at Animals in Human History is historical. The book is divided into six chronological chapters, conventionally labeled “Prehistory,” “Antiquity,” “The Middle Ages,” “The Renaissance,” “The Enlightenment,” and “Modernity.” As the periodization suggests, and as Kalof apologetically notes in the preface, the “human history” of the title refers only to “the western world” (viii). In fact, her geographical scope is even narrower; the book focuses almost exclusively on northwestern Europe, especially on Great Britain. Even when so restricted, however, “human history” remains an unwieldy span. Hence, as her title more reliably indicates, Kalof has chosen to analyze the role played by animals primarily through their representation in visual and plastic art.

Such representations constitute a rich and suggestive source of evidence. Kalof’s account emphasizes such famous works as the Paleolithic cave paintings of Spain and southern France, Albrecht Dürer’s rhinoceros, and William Hogarth’s “Four Stages of Cruelty.” She also discusses less well-known and more popular animal images—mosaics from ancient homes, prints illustrating eighteenth- and nineteenth-century animal shows, and photographs of hunting trophies. Her interpretations are supported by numerous well-selected and nicely reproduced illustrations, a few in impressive color.

This book is not intended as a history of animal art, however, but as a history of the relations between humans and animals as presented through art. The unavoidable question is whether such representations provide an adequate basis for historical generalization. Kalof implicitly acknowledges this issue by attempting to place her discussions of individual representations in context. But, given the extended chronological scope of the book and its brief length in pages, most of her background summaries seem potted. In addition, her individual chapters convey little sense of historical change, even though the last three cover two centuries each and the first three cover much longer periods. Conversely, some topics—for example, the emergence of humane sentiment and activism—recur in several succeeding chapters, without any acknowledgment of historical continuity.

Other problems result at least in part from Kalof’s exclusive reliance on secondary sources. She emphasizes the topics that other scholars have studied; what they have neglected remains in the dark. Hence, her book does not contain any surprises for historians with an established interest in its subject, but it may offer others a useful, if partial, introduction to the field.