f^ M. Cuyier on the Domesticatum of 



mere modification of it. To establish this truth, I shall not re- 

 peat what I have already stated respecting sociability in the me- 

 moir which I published on that subject ; I shall merely consider 

 the domestic animals, with regard to man, as compared with 

 what the social animals are with regard to one another. 



When, by our benefits, we have attached to us individuals 

 of a social species, we have developed to our own advantage, we 

 have directed toward ourselves, the propensity which impelled 

 them to draw rear to their fellows. The habit of living near us 

 has become in them a want so much the more powerful, that it 

 is founded in nature ; and the sheep which we have reared is 

 led to follow us as it would be led to follow the flock among 

 which it was brought forth ; but our superior intellect soon de- 

 stroys all equality between animals and us ; and it is our will 

 which governs theirs, as the stallion, which, from its superiority, 

 has become the chief of the herd which it leads, draws after it 

 all the individuals of which this herd is composed. There^is 

 no resistance, so long as each individual can act conformably to 

 the wants by which it is excited ; it commences whenever this 

 situation is changed. It is for this reason that the obedience of 

 animals to us is not more absolute than to their natural chiefs ; 

 and if our authority is greater than theirs, it is because our 

 means of enticement are also greater, and because we have been 

 able to restrain, in a great degree, the inclinations which, in 

 the natural state, would have excited the will of the animals 

 which we have associated with us. The individuals which have 

 passed from hand to hand, which have had several masters, and 

 in which, from this circumstance, most of the natural disposi- 

 tions are weakened, if not effaced, appear to shew the same do- 

 cility toward every person ; they are subjected to the whole hu- 

 man species. This state of things cannot exist with regard to 

 animals that are not domesticated ; but the analogy recurs, 

 when we consider the> individuals, whether isolated or in herds, 

 which have never had but one master ; it is he alone whom 

 they acknowledge as their chief, he only whom they obey ; every 

 other person would be unknown, and would even be treated as 

 an enemy by the species which do not belong to races over 

 which domestication has exerted its whole influence, that is to 

 say, as an individual would be treated when he presented him- 



