Donkey milk knowledge archive · Historical source

Parmentier and Deyeux (1799): donkey milk in an early milk comparison

The two Parisian chemists compared the milk of women, cows, goats, she-asses, ewes and mares. In their ranking table, donkey milk comes first for whey content and second for milk sugar.

Historical account: The information reproduced here reflects the knowledge of its time. It is not scientifically substantiated, is not a recommendation and cannot be applied to today. Donkey milk is a food, not a remedy.
An VII (1799)France (Paris/Strasbourg)Early milk chemistry
Author
Antoine-Augustin Parmentier (1737–1813) and Nicolas Deyeux (1745–1837)
Work
Précis d’expériences et observations sur les différentes espèces de lait
Passage
“Du lait d’ânesse”, pp. 260–264; milking practice pp. 207–208; ranking table pp. 418–419 (Strasbourg/Paris, An VII)
Time & place
An VII (1799) · France (Paris/Strasbourg)
Type of source
Early milk chemistry

In the original words

What the original says

Après le lait de vache c’est le lait d’ânesse dont la médecine tire le meilleur parti; l’usage s’en est conservé depuis les Grecs jusqu’à nous

After cow’s milk, it was donkey milk that medicine [of their time] made the most use of; this use had been preserved since the Greeks.

Frenchp. 260

Le lait d’ânesse est, parmi les différentes espèces de lait, un de ceux qui contiennent le moins de matière caséeuse.

Among the various types of milk, donkey milk is one of those with the lowest proportion of cheesy substance.

Frenchp. 263

English rendering: our own translation by the DON DONKEY’S editorial team, following the sense of the text.

Background

Who, when, what kind of text

Parmentier, known as the promoter of the potato in France, and the apothecary Deyeux submitted a prize essay to the Société royale de médecine in 1788. The question was to determine the nature of the milk of women, cows, goats, she-asses, ewes and mares by comparative physical and chemical investigation. They expanded the prize-winning work into this book.

Around 1800, chemistry was in its infancy: milk was separated into cream, butter, “cheesy matter”, whey and “milk salt” (milk sugar), but proteins in today’s sense could not yet be determined. The authors themselves stress that exact quantities were not possible because of the variations between animals.

Content

What the source reports about donkey milk

In the chapter “Du lait d’ânesse” (pp. 260–264), the authors describe donkey milk as similar to human milk in colour, taste and consistency, but chemically distinguishable. The cream was never thick or abundant, and the butter obtained from it soft and white. Acids and alcohol caused the cheesy matter to precipitate in very fine particles instead of a solid mass as with cow’s, sheep’s and goat’s milk.

For milk sugar, they observed clear differences between the animals: three equal portions from three she-asses each yielded noticeably different amounts. The milk sugar obtained was the same as that of human and cow’s milk.

A practical observation (pp. 207–208): when a she-ass was led from house to house and milked for several patients in succession, the first received the most watery milk and the last the fattiest. The authors therefore suggested milking once and dividing the yield.

In the ranking table at the end (p. 418), they rank the six types of milk: for whey content (“sérum”) the she-ass comes first, for milk sugar (“sel essentiel”) second, and for butter and cheesy matter near the bottom. They group human, donkey and mare’s milk together as a separate group.

At a glance

Figures & facts from the source

6types of milk compared (woman, cow, goat, she-ass, ewe, mare)
1788prize essay for the Société royale de médecine
1strank of donkey milk for whey content (table p. 418)
2ndrank for milk sugar, after human milk
3she-asses yielded clearly different amounts of sugar

Critical assessment

How reliable is this source?

Scientific value

An early systematic comparative study of different types of milk, prize-winning and fully digitised. The ranking agrees in tendency with modern analyses.

Limitations

There are no percentages; the authors deliberately refrain from giving them because the samples varied too much. The methods of the time are crude by today’s standards.

Today’s assessment

The medical remarks reflect medical practice around 1800 and cannot be transferred to today. The chemical part, by contrast, is a valuable piece of the history of science.

Our assessment

For us, a revealing source from this period: here donkey milk is compared chemically with other types of milk early on and systematically. That the results varied from animal to animal is also described by studies today.

References

Sources to check

More sources and studies in the research archive. Summarised by the DON DONKEY’S editorial team, as of November 2026.