Chapter 15
Part 15
[Footnote 107: _Ibid._ p. 367.]
[Footnote 108: Dunbar, _loc. cit._ p. 740.]
Nor is there any reason whatever to suppose that the Brahman boys whom the Gonds of India used to kidnap and keep as victims to be sacrificed on various occasions,[109] were regarded as representatives of a spirit or god. They were offered up to Bhímsen, the chief object of worship among the Gonds, represented by a piece of iron fixed in a stone or in a tree,[110] now "to sanctify a marriage, now to be wedded to the soil, and again to be given away to the evil spirit of the epidemic raging," or "on the eve of a struggle."[111]
[Footnote 109: Frazer, _op. cit._ ii. 241.]
[Footnote 110: _Panjab Notes and Queries_, § 550, vol. ii. 90.]
[Footnote 111: _Ibid._ § 721, vol. ii. 127 _sq._]
Dr. Frazer writes:--"At Lagos In Guinea it was the custom annually to impale a young girl alive soon after the spring equinox in order to secure good crops . . . . A similar sacrifice used to be annually offered at Benin."[112] But Dr. Frazer omits an important fact mentioned or alluded to by the two authorities he quotes which gives us the key to the custom, without suggesting that it has anything to do with the corn-spirit. Adams states that the young woman was impaled "to propitiate the favour of the goddess presiding over the rainy season, that she may fill the horn of plenty."[113] And M. Bouche observes, "Au Bénin, on a conservé jusqu'à présent un usage qui régnait jadis à Lagos et ailleurs: celui d'empaler une jeune fille, au commencement de la saison des pluies, afin de rendre les orichas propices aux récoltes."[114] From these statements it appears that the sacrifice was intended to influence the rain, on which the crops essentially depend. That its immediate object was to produce rain is expressly affirmed by Sir R. Burton. At Benin he saw "a young woman lashed to a scaffolding upon the summit of a tall blasted tree and being devoured by the turkey-buzzards. The people declared it to be a 'fetish,' or {450} charm for bringing rain."[115] We have previously noticed that the people of Benin also have recourse to a human sacrifice if there is too much rain, or too much sun, so that the crops are in danger of being spoiled.[116] The theory of substitution accounts for all these cases.
[Footnote 112: Frazer, _op. cit._ ii. 239.]
[Footnote 113: Adams, _Sketches taken during Ten Voyages to Africa_, p. 25.]
[Footnote 114: Bouche, _Sept ans en Afrique occidentale_, p. 132.]
[Footnote 115: Burton, _Abeokuta_, i. 19 n.*]
[Footnote 116: _Supra_, p. 443 _sq._]
The practice of offering human victims for the purpose of preventing drought and famine by producing rain is apparently not restricted to West Africa. In the beginning of their year, the ancient Mexicans sacrificed many prisoners of war and children who had been purchased for that purpose, to the gods of water, so as to induce them to give the rain necessary for the crops.[117] The Pipiles of Guatemala celebrated every year two festivals which were accompanied by human sacrifices, the one in the beginning of the rainy season, the other in the beginning of the dry season.[118] In India, among the aboriginal tribes to the south-west of Beerbhoom, Sir W. W. Hunter "heard vague reports of human sacrifices in the forests, with a view to procuring the early arrival of the rains."[119] Without venturing to express any definite opinion on a very obscure subject which has already led to so many guesses,[120] I may perhaps be justified in here calling attention to the fact that Zeus Lycæus, in whose cult human sacrifices played a prominent part, was conceived of as a god who sent the rain.[121] It appears from ancient traditions or legends that the idea of procuring rainfall by means of such sacrifices was not unfamiliar to the Greeks. A certain Molpis offered himself to Zeus Ombrios, the rain-god, in time of drought.[122] Pausanias tells us that once, when a drought had for some time afflicted Greece, messengers were sent to Delphi to inquire the cause, and to beg for a riddance of the evil. The Pythian priestess told them to propitiate Zeus, and that Aeacus should be the intercessor; and then Aeacus, by sacrifices and prayers to Panhellenian Zeus, procured rain for Greece.[123] But Diodorus adds that the drought and famine, whilst ceasing in all other parts of the country, still continued in Attica, so that the {451} Athenians once more resorted to the Oracle. The answer was now given them that they had to expiate the murder of Androgeus, and that this should be done in any way his father, Minos, required. The satisfaction demanded by the latter was, that they every nine years should send seven boys and as many girls to be devoured by the Minotaur, and that this should be done as long as the monster lived. So the **Athenians did, and the calamity ceased.[124]
[Footnote 117: Sahagun, _Historia general de las cosas de Nueva España_, i. 50. Torquemada, _Monarchia Indiana_, ii. 251. Clavigero, _op. cit._ i. 297.]
[Footnote 118: Stoll, _Ethnologie der Indianerstämme von Guatemala_, p. 46.]
[Footnote 119: Hunter, _Annals of Rural Bengal_, i. 128.]
[Footnote 120: See Immerwahr, _Die Kulte und Mythen Arkadiens_, i. 16 _sqq._ Professor Robertson Smith suggests ('Sacrifice,' in _Encyclopædia Britannica_, xxi. 136) that the human sacrifices offered to Zeus Lycæus were originally cannibal feasts of a wolf tribe.]
[Footnote 121: Pausanias, viii. 38. 4. Farnell, _op. cit._ i. 41.]
[Footnote 122: Farnell, _op. cit._ i. 42.]
[Footnote 123: Pausanias, ii. 29. 7 _sq._]
[Footnote 124: Diodorus Siculus, _op. cit._ iv. 61. 1 _sqq._]
As an instance of the close relationship which exists between human sacrifices offered for agricultural purposes and other human sacrifices, the following case may also be mentioned. According to Strachey, the Indians in some part of Virginia had a yearly sacrifice of children. These sacrifices they held so necessary that if they should omit them, they supposed their gods "would let them no deare, turkies, corne, nor fish," and, besides, "would make a great slaughter amongst them."[125]
[Footnote 125: Strachey, _History of Travaile into Virginia Britannia_, p. 95 _sq._]
Men require for their subsistence not only food, but drink. Hence when the earth fails to supply them with water, they are liable to regard it as an attempt against their lives, which can be averted only by the sacrifice of a human substitute.
In India, in former times, human victims were offered to several minor gods "whenever a newly excavated tank failed to produce sufficient water."[126] In Kâthiâwâr, for instance, if a pond had been dug and would not hold water, a man was sacrificed; and the Vadala lake in Bombay "refused to hold water till the local spirit was appeased by the sacrifice of the daughter of the village headman."[127] There is a legend that, when the bed of the Saugor lake remained dry, the builder "was told, in a dream, or by a priest, that it would continue so till he should consent to sacrifice his own daughter, then a girl, and the young lad to whom she had been affianced, to the tutelary god of the place. He accordingly built a little shrine in the centre of the valley, which was to become the bed of the lake, put the two children in, and built up the doorway. He had no sooner done so than the whole of the valley became filled with water."[128] When Colonel Campbell was rescuing Meriahs among the {452} Kandhs, it was believed by some that he was collecting victims for the purpose of sacrificing them on the plains to the water deity, because the water had disappeared from a large tank which he had constructed.[129] According to a story related by Pausanias, the district of Haliartus was originally parched and waterless, hence one of the rulers went to Delphi and inquired how the people should find water in the land. "The Pythian priestess commanded him to slay the first person he should meet on his return to Haliartus. On his arrival he was met by his son Lophis, and, without hesitation, he struck the young man with his sword. The youth had life enough left to run about, and where the blood flowed water gushed from the ground. Therefore the river is called Lophis."[130]
[Footnote 126: Rájendralála Mitra, _op. cit._ ii. 111.]
[Footnote 127: Crooke, _Popular Religion of Northern India_, ii. 174.]
[Footnote 128: Sleeman, _Rambles_, i. 129 _sq._]
[Footnote 129: Campbell, _Wild Tribes of Khondistan_, p. 129.]
[Footnote 130: Pausanias, ix. 33. 4.]
Human sacrifices are offered with a view to averting perils arising from the sea or from rivers.
When the Greeks were afflicted by stress of weather at Aulis, they were bidden to sacrifice Iphigenia, in order to lull the winds.[131] Menelaus was persecuted by the Egyptians for sacrificing two children when he was desirous of sailing away and contrary winds detained him.[132] According to an Athenian writer, the colonists who first went to Lesbos were directed by an oracle to throw a virgin into the sea, as an offering to Poseidon.[133] Sextus Pompeius cast men into the sea as an offering to Neptune.[134] Hamilcar, also, following a custom of his country, threw a company of priests into the sea, as a sacrifice to the sea god.[135] The Saxons, when they were about to leave the coast of Gaul and sail home, sacrificed the tenth part of their captives.[136] The Vikings of Scandinavia, when launching a new ship, seemed to have bound a victim to the rollers on which the vessel slipped into the sea, thus reddening the keel with sacrificial blood.[137] In 1784, at the launching of one of the Bey of Tripoli's cruisers, a black slave was led forward and fastened at the prow of the vessel.[138] The Fijians launched their canoes over the living bodies of slaves as rollers,[139] or, according to {453} another account, when a large canoe was launched, they laid hold of the first person, man or woman, whom they encountered, and carried the victim home for a feast.[140] On the deck of a new boat belonging to the most powerful chief in the group, ten or more men were slaughtered, in order that it might be washed with human blood.[141]
[Footnote 131: Aeschylus, _Agamemnon_, 215 _sq._]
[Footnote 132: Herodotus, ii. 119.]
[Footnote 133: Athenæus, _Deipnosophistæ_, xi. 15.]
[Footnote 134: Dio Cassius, _Historia Romana_, xlviii. 48.]
[Footnote 135: Diodorus Siculus, xiii. 86.]
[Footnote 136: Sidonius Apollinaris, _Epistulæ_, viii. 6. 15.]
[Footnote 137: Vigfusson and Powell, _op. cit._ i. 410; ii. 349.]
[Footnote 138: Simpson, quoted by Grant Allen, _Evolution of the Idea of God_, p. 263.]
[Footnote 139: Erskine, _Cruise among the Islands of the Western Pacific_, p. 249.]
[Footnote 140: Wilkes, _U.S. Exploring Expedition_, iii. 97. _Cf._ Williams and Calvert, _op. cit._ p. 175.]
[Footnote 141: Wilkes, _op. cit._ iii. 97.]
The Zuñi Indians have a tradition that the waters of their valley once rose in a flood and compelled the inhabitants to flee to a table-land several hundred feet high for safety; and when the waters still rose, threatening to submerge the table-land itself, the priest determined to sacrifice a youth and a maiden to propitiate them.[142] When Seleucus Nicator founded Antioch on the Orontes, the high priest sacrificed a virgin at a place between the town and the river,[143] presumably in order to prevent the town from being flooded by the river. When the converted Franks marched to Italy under their king, Theodebert, to fight against the Goths under Vitigis, and were on the point of crossing the Po, they sacrificed what children and wives of Goths they found, and threw their corpses into the river, according to Procopius, "as the first fruits of the war."[144] At Rome, every year on the Ides of May, the Vestal Virgins threw from the Sublician bridge into the Tiber thirty human effigies formed of rushes; the Romans themselves were of opinion that at an earlier period living men had been hurled into the river, and that it was Hercules who first substituted images of straw.[145] In West Africa human sacrifices are often offered to rivers. Major Ellis states that at each town or considerable village upon the banks of the river Prah sacrifice is held on a day about the middle of October, to Prah. "As loss of life frequently occurs in this river, from persons attempting to cross it when flooded, from a sudden rise, or from those hundred minor accidents which must always occur in the neighbourhood of a deep and strong stream, the gods of the Prah are considered very malignant. The sacrifice is, in consequence, proportionate. The usual sacrifice in former times was two human adults, one male and one female. They. . . . were decapitated on the bank of the river, and the stool and image of the god washed with their {454} blood. The bodies were then cut into a number of pieces, which were distributed amongst the mangroves, or the sedge bordering the river, for the crocodiles to eat; crocodiles being sacred in Prah."[146] According to M. le Comte de Cardi, all the river-side tribes of the Niger Delta used to propitiate the river deity by the sacrifice of a copper-coloured girl, procured from a tribe of Ibos inhabiting a country away in the hinterland of New Calabar, or in some places an Albino; and it seems that this custom is still practised in the British Protectorate.[147] The Ibos themselves were in the habit of throwing human beings into the river to be eaten by alligators or fishes, or to fasten them to trees or branches, close to the river, where they were left to perish by hunger.[148] In Eastern Central Africa, also, human sacrifices are offered to rivers.[149] And in the East Indies there are various traditions of such sacrifices being made to the divine crocodiles of the sea.[150]
[Footnote 142: Stevenson, 'A Chapter of Zuñi Mythology,' in _Memoirs of the International Congress of Anthropology_, Chicago, p. 316.]
[Footnote 143: Malala, _Chronographia_, viii. 255 (200).]
[Footnote 144: Procopius, _Bellum Gothicum_, ii. 25.]
[Footnote 145: Ovid, _Fasti_, 621 _sq._ Dionysius of Halicarnassus, _Antiquitates Romanæ_, i. 38. Hartland, _Legend of Perseus_, iii. 78.]
[Footnote 146: Ellis, _Tshi-speaking Peoples_, p. 64 _sq._ _Cf._ _Idem_, _Land of Fetish_, p. 122.]
[Footnote 147: Comte de Cardi, 'Ju-ju Laws and Customs in the Niger Delta,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxix. 54. _Cf._ Mockler-Ferryman, _British Nigeria_, p. 235.]
[Footnote 148: Schoen and Crowther, _op. cit._ p. 49.]
[Footnote 149: Macdonald, _Africana_, i. 96.]
[Footnote 150: Tylor, 'Anniversary Address,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxi. 408. Hartland, _op. cit._ iii. 70 _sq._]
In the cases which we have hitherto considered the offering of human sacrifices is mostly a matter of public concern, a method of ensuring the lives of many by the death of one or a few. But human life is also sacrificed, by way of substitution, for the purpose of preventing the death of some particular individual, especially a chief or a king, from sickness, old age, or other circumstances.
In Guatemala, in the case of a dangerous illness, human sacrifice was resorted to when all other attempts to cure the patient failed. Of the Indians of Guayaquil, Cieza de Leon states:--"When the chiefs were sick, to appease the wrath of their gods, and pray for health, they made . . . . sacrifices of a superstitious nature, killing men (as I was told), and believing that human blood was a grateful offering."[151] Acosta writes:--"They vsed in Peru to sacrifice yong children of foure or six yeares old vnto tenne; and the greatest parte of these sacrifices were for the affaires that did import the Ynca, as in sickness for his health, and when he went to the {455} warres for victory, or when they gave the wreathe to their new Ynca, which is the marke of a King, as heere the Scepter and the Crowne be. In this solemnitie they sacrificed the number of two hundred children, from foure to ten yeares of age . . . . If any Indian qualified or of the common sorte were sicke, and that the Divine told him confidently that he should die, they did then sacrifice his owne sonne to the Sunne or to Virachoca, desiring them to be satisfied with him, and that they would not deprive the father of life."[152] According to Molina, "the Lord Ynca offered sacrifices [of children] when he began to reign, that the _huacas_ [or idols] might give him health, and preserve his dominions in peace."[153] Herrera tells us that the ancient Peruvians, when any person of note was sick, and the priest predicted his death, sacrificed the patient's son, "desiring the idol to be satisfie'd with him, and not to take away his father's life."[154] Garcilasso de la Vega, again, denies the existence of any such custom in the kingdom of the Incas,[155] but asserts that, before their reign, the Indians of Peru offered up their own children on certain occasions.[156] According to Jerez, some of the Peruvian Indians sacrificed their own children each month, and anointed with the blood the faces of their idols and the doors of their temples.[157] The Tonga Islanders had a ceremony called _nawgia_, or the ceremony of strangling children as sacrifices to the gods, for the recovery of a sick relative. Our informant says:--"All the bystanders behold the innocent victim with feelings of the greatest pity; but it is proper, they think, to sacrifice a child who is at present of no use to society, and perhaps may not otherwise live to be, with the hope of recovering a sick chief, whom all esteem and whom all think it a most important duty to respect, defend, and preserve, that his life may be of advantage to the country."[158] The Tahitians offered human sacrifices during the illnesses of their rulers.[159] In the Philippines, if a prince was dangerously ill or dying, slaves were slaughtered in order to satisfy the malignant ancestral soul who was supposed to have caused the disease.[160] Among the Dyaks, when a raja "falls sick, or goes on a journey, it is {456} common for him to vow a head to his tribe in case of recovery or of safe return. Should he die, one or two heads are usually offered by the tribe as a kind of sacrifice."[161] Among the Banjârîlu of Southern India, who are great travelling traders, it was formerly the custom "before starting out on a journey to procure a little child, and bury it in the ground up to its shoulders, and then drive their loaded bullocks over the unfortunate victim, and in proportion to the bullocks thoroughly trampling the child to death, so their belief in a successful journey increased."[162] In India human sacrifices were also offered to the goddess Chandiká to save the life of a king.[163] It is probable that the idea of substitution likewise accounts for the sacrifice of a young girl which a certain raja is reported to have offered in 1861, at the shrine of the goddess Durga, in the town of Jaipúr, when he installed himself at his father's decease,[164] and for the sacrifice of a Brahmin which a raja of Ratanpúr had offered up to Deví every year.[165] In Great Benin, once a year, at the end of the rainy season, all the king's beads were brought out by the boys in whose care they were kept. They were put in a heap, and a slave was compelled to kneel down over them. The king cut or struck the head of the slave with a spear so that the blood ran over the beads, and said to them, "Oh, beads, when I put you on, give me wisdom and don't let any juju or bad thing come near me." Then the slave was told, "So you shall tell the head juju when you see him." The slave was led out and beheaded, but his head was brought in again, and the beads were touched with it.[166] Among the ancient Gauls persons who were troubled with unusually severe diseases either sacrificed men or promised that they would make such sacrifices.[167] In the Ynglingasaga we are told that King Aun sacrificed nine sons, one after the other, to Odin for the purpose of obtaining a prolongation of his life.[168] According to Macrobius, the ancient Romans immolated children to the goddess Mania, the mother of the Lares, "to promote the health of the families."[169] Suetonius states that Nero, frightened by the sight of a comet, sacrificed a number of Roman noblemen {457} in order to avert the disaster from himself.[170] Antinous, according to one account, sacrificed himself to prolong the life of Hadrian.[171] The notion that the death of one person may serve as a substitute for the death of another still prevails in the Vatican. When, during Leo XIII.'s last illness, one of the Cardinals died, it was said that his death had saved the life of the Pope, Heaven being satisfied with one victim. In Morocco, if a son or a daughter dies, it is customary to say to the afflicted parents, "Why are you sorry? Your child took away your misfortune (_bas_)." A similar custom prevails in Syria and Palestine.[172]
[Footnote 151: Cieza de Leon, _La Crónica del Perú_ [parte primera], ch. 55 (_Biblioteca de autores españoles_, xxvi. 409).]
[Footnote 152: Acosta, _op. cit._ ii. 344.]
[Footnote 153: de Molina, _loc. cit._ p. 55.]
[Footnote 154: Herrera, _General History of the West Indies_, iv. 347.]
[Footnote 155: Garcilasso de la Vega, _op. cit._ i. 131.]
[Footnote 156: _Ibid._ i. 50.]
[Footnote 157: Jerez, 'Conquista del Perú,' in _Biblioteca de autores españoles_, xxvi. 327.]
[Footnote 158: Mariner, _Natives of the Tonga Islands_, ii. 220.]
[Footnote 159: Ellis, _Polynesian Researches_, i. 346.]
[Footnote 160: Blumentritt, quoted by Wilken, 'Ueber das Haaropfer,' in _Revue coloniale internationale_, 1887, i. 364 _sq._]
[Footnote 161: Pfeiffer, _A Lady's Second Journey round the World_, i. 86.]
[Footnote 162: Cain, 'Bhadrachellam and Rekapalli Taluqas,' in _Indian Antiquary_, viii. 219.]
[Footnote 163: Crooke, _Popular Religion in Northern India_, ii. 168.]
[Footnote 164: _North Indian Notes and Queries_, § 310, vol. i. 40.]
[Footnote 165: _Panjab Notes and Queries_, § 869, vol. ii. 162.]
[Footnote 166: Moor and Roupell, quoted by Read and Dalton, _op. cit._ p. 7; also by Ling Roth, _Great Benin_, p. 71.]
[Footnote 167: Cæsar, _De bello gallico_, vi. 16.]
[Footnote 168: Snorri Sturluson, 'Ynglingasaga,' 25, in _Heimskringla_, i. 45 _sqq._]
[Footnote 169: Macrobius, _Saturnalia_, i. 7.]
[Footnote 170: Suetonius, _Nero_, 36.]
[Footnote 171: Spartian, _Vita Hadriani_, 14. Aurelius Victor, _De Cæsaribus_, 14. Dio Cassius, _Historia Romana_, lxix. 11.]
[Footnote 172: Curtiss, _Primitive Semitic Religion To-day_, p. 208.]
Men are sacrificed not only to preserve the lives of other men, but to help other men into existence. Barrenness is attributed to some god keeping back the children which would otherwise be born in the due course of nature. And in order to remove this obstacle a human being, generally a child, is sacrificed to serve, as it were, as a substitute. This I take to be the explanation of the practice of offering a human sacrifice with a view to promoting fecundity, a practice which has been particularly common in India.
In the history of ancient Mexico we read of Nezahualcoyotl, prince of the Tezcucans, who had been married some years without being blest with issue. "The priests represented that it was owing to his neglect of the gods of his country, and that his only remedy was to propitiate them by human sacrifice."[173] In Hindu traditions and books a numerous offspring is promised to him who offers a man in sacrifice.[174] In Jainteapore, east of Sylhet, human sacrifices were made to the goddess Kali, in hopes of procuring progeny.[175] Speaking of the Mahadeo sandstone hills which, in the Sathpore range, overlook the Nerbudda to the south, Sir W. H. Sleeman states:--"When a woman is without children she makes votive offerings to all the gods who can, she thinks, assist her; and promises of still greater in case they should grant what she wants. Smaller promises being found of no avail, she at last promises her first-born, if a {458} male, to the god of destruction, Mahadeo. If she gets a son she conceals from him her vows till he has attained the age of puberty; she then communicates it to him, and enjoins him to fulfil it." From that moment he regards himself as devoted to the god, and, at the annual fair on the Mahadeo hills, throws himself from a perpendicular height of four or five hundred feet, and is dashed to pieces upon the rocks below.[176] In one of the tales of Somadeva an ascetic tells a woman that, if she killed her young son and offered him to the divinity, another son would certainly be born to her.[177] We meet with a similar idea in the story of king Somaka. For some time he did not succeed in getting a single son from any of his one hundred wives. Finally he got a single son; but he wanted more, and asked the family priest whether there was not a ceremony which could help him to a hundred sons. The family priest answered:--"O king! let me set on foot a sacrifice, and thou must sacrifice thy son, Jantu, in it. Then on no distant date, a century of handsome sons will be born to thee. When Jantu's fat will be put into the fire as an offering to the gods, the mothers will take a smell of that smoke, and bring forth a number of sons, valorous and strong. And Jantu also will once more be born as a self-begotten son of thine, in that very mother; and on his back there will appear a mark of gold." The son was sacrificed; the wives smelt the smell of the burnt-offering; all of them became with child; and when ten months had passed one hundred sons were born to Somaka, of whom Jantu was the eldest, being born of his former mother. But the family priest departed this life, and was grilled for a certain period in a terrible hell as a punishment for what he had done.[178]
[Footnote 173: Prescott, _History of the Conquest of Mexico_, p. 91.]
[Footnote 174: Chevers, _op. cit._ p. 399.]
[Footnote 175: Macnaghten, quoted _ibid._ p. 397.]
[Footnote 176: Sleeman, _op. cit._ i. 132 _sq._]
[Footnote 177: Crooke, _Popular Religion of Northern India_, ii. 173.]
[Footnote 178: _Mahabharata_, Vana Parva, 127 _sq._ (pt. vi. p. 188 _sq._).]
Among certain peoples it is a regular custom to kill the firstborn child, or the firstborn son.
Among some natives of Australia a mother used to kill and eat her first child, as this was believed to strengthen her for later births.[179] In New South Wales the firstborn of every lubra used to be eaten by the tribe "as part of a religious ceremony."[180] In the realm of Khai-muh, in China, according to {459} a native account, it was customary to kill and devour the eldest son alive.[181] Among certain tribes in British Columbia the first child is often sacrificed to the sun.[182] The Indians of Florida, according to Le Moyne de Morgues, sacrificed the firstborn son to the chief.[183] We are told that, among the people of Senjero in Eastern Africa, many families "must offer up their firstborn sons as sacrifices, because once upon a time, when summer and winter were jumbled together in a bad season, and the fruits of the field would not ripen, the sooth-sayers enjoined it."[184] The heathen Russians often sacrificed their firstborn to the god Perun.[185] The rule laid down in Exodus[186] and Numbers,[187] that all the firstborn of men and of beasts belonged to the Lord, but that the former were to be redeemed, seems to indicate the existence of an earlier custom among the Hebrews of offering up as a sacrifice, not only the firstling of an animal, but the firstborn child. As traces of such a custom may probably be regarded the story of Abraham's surrender of his firstborn son to God and the tradition of the origin of the Passover.[188] Among the Hindus, until the beginning of the last century, many parents sacrificed their firstborn to the river Ganges.[189]
[Footnote 179: Brinton, _Religions of Primitive Peoples_, p. 17 n.* _Cf._ von Scherzer, _Reise der Oesterreichischen Fregatte Novara um die Erde_, iii. 32.]
[Footnote 180: Brough Smyth, _Aborigines of Victoria_, ii. 311.]
[Footnote 181: de Groot, _Religious System of China_ (vol. ii. book) i. 679.]
[Footnote 182: Boas, in _Fifth Report on the North-Western Tribes of Canada_, pp. 46, 52.]
[Footnote 183: Bry, _Narrative of Le Moyne_, Descriptions of the Illustrations, 34, p. 13. _Cf._ Lafitau, _M[oe]urs des sauvages ameriquains_, i. 181; Strachey, _op. cit._ p. 84.]
[Footnote 184: Krapf, _Travels_, p. 69 _sq._]
[Footnote 185: Mone, quoted by Frazer, _Golden Bough_, ii. 52.]
[Footnote 186: _Exodus_, xiii. 2, 15.]
[Footnote 187: _Numbers_, xviii. 15.]
[Footnote 188: See Ghillany, _op. cit._ p. 494 _sqq._; Kuenen, _Religion of Israel_, ii. 92; Frazer, _op. cit._ ii. 47 _sqq._]
[Footnote 189: Rájendralála Mitra, _op. cit._ ii. 70, 76.]
In some instances the firstborn seems to be killed, not in sacrifice to a god, but for the purpose of being eaten as a kind of medicine.[190] In other cases the act is a sacrifice in the true sense of the word and, apparently, substitutional in character. Considering that children are occasionally sacrificed to save the lives of their parents, or for the health of the families, or to promote fecundity, it seems probable that the regular sacrifice of the firstborn has similar objects in view. This supposition, indeed, is strongly supported by some statements in which the motive of the act is expressly mentioned.[191] Among the {460} Coast Salish of British Columbia the first child is sacrificed to the sun "to secure health and happiness to the whole family."[192] The same is reported of a neighbouring people, the Kutonaqa. The mother prays to the sun:--"I am with child. When it is born I shall offer it to you. Have pity upon us."[193] Among some tribes of South-Eastern Africa it is a rule that, when a woman's husband has been killed in battle and she marries again, the first child to which she gives birth after her second marriage must be put to death, whether she has it by her first or her second husband. Such a child is called "the child of the assegai," and if it were not killed, death or accident would be sure to befall the second spouse, and the woman herself would be barren.[194] Among some peoples, including the ancient Hindus, we find the belief that the son is in some sense identical with his father, that he is a new birth, a new manifestation of the same person.[195] The new birth might be supposed to endanger the life of the father, just as, according to a notion prevalent among the ancient Teutons[196] and in some parts of Italy,[197] a person would soon die if his name were given to his son or grandson whilst he was still alive. Among the Brazilian Tupis the father was accustomed to take a new name after the birth of each new son;[198] whilst, on killing an enemy, a person used to take the enemy's name so as to annihilate not only his body but also his soul.[199] Among the Kafirs, "if a mother gives birth to twins, one is frequently killed by the father, for the natives think that unless the father places a lump of earth in the mouth of one of the babies he will lose his strength."[200] In some {461} cases the practice of killing the firstborn son might possibly be traced back to a similar belief. But I can quote no fact directly supporting this suggestion.
[Footnote 190: _Cf._ _supra_, p. 401.]
[Footnote 191: _Cf._ _Micah_, vi. 7: "Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?"]
[Footnote 192: Boas, _op. cit._ p. 46.]
[Footnote 193: _Ibid._ p. 52.]
[Footnote 194: Macdonald, _Light in Africa_, p. 156. Frazer, _op. cit._ ii. 51 _sq._]
[Footnote 195: Hartland, _op. cit._ i. 217 _sq._ von den Steinen, _Unter den Naturvölkern Zentral-Brasiliens_, p. 336 _sq._ Leist, _Alt-arisches Jus Gentium_, p. 98 _sqq._ _Idem_, _Alt-arisches Jus Civile_, i. 189 _sqq._ _Laws of Manu_, ix. 8: "The husband, after conception by his wife, becomes an embryo and is born again of her."]
[Footnote 196: Storm, quoted by Noreen, _Spridda Studier_, Anara Samlingen, p. 4.]
[Footnote 197: Placucci, _Usi e pregiudizj dei contadini della Romagna_, p. 23.]
[Footnote 198: von den Steinen, _op. cit._ p. 337.]
[Footnote 199: Staden, quoted by Andree, _Anthropophagie_, p. 103.]
[Footnote 200: Kidd, _The Essential Kafir_, p. 202. I am indebted to Mr. N. W. Thomas for drawing my attention to this statement.]
Human sacrifices are offered in connection with the foundation of buildings. This is a wide-spread custom, which not only occurs among various uncivilised and semi-civilised peoples of the present day, but which is proved to have existed among the so-called Aryan races.[201] In India we find traces of it in traditions and popular beliefs.[202] The Hindu rajas, we are told, used to lay the foundation of public buildings in human blood.[203] When Mr. Grierson wanted to photograph a Bih[=a]r peasant house, the grandmother of the family refused to allow any of the children to appear in the picture, her reason being that the Government was building the bridge across the Gandak and wanted children to bury under the foundations.[204] Among the ancient Romans the old custom survived in the practice of placing statues or images under the foundations of their buildings.[205] In the island of Zacynthus the peasants to this day believe that in order to secure the durability of important buildings, such as bridges and fortresses, it is desirable to kill a man, especially a Muhammedan or a Jew, and bury him on the spot.[206] South Slavonian folk-tales speak of the immuration of a woman or a child as a foundation sacrifice.[207] In Servia no city was thought to be secure unless a human being, or at least the shadow of one, was built into its walls;[208] and the Bulgarians, when {462} going to build, are still said to take a thread and measure the shadow of some casual passer-by, and then bury the measure under the foundation-stone, expecting that the man whose shadow has been thus treated will soon die.[209] A similar custom prevails in Roumania.[210] According to Nennius, when Dinas Emris in Wales was founded by Gortigern, all the materials collected for the fortress were carried away in one night; and materials were thus gathered thrice, and were thrice carried away. When he then asked of his Druids, "Whence this evil?" the Druids told him that it was necessary to find a child whose father was unknown, put him to death, and sprinkle with his blood the ground on which the citadel was to be built.[211] A Scotch legend tells that, when St. Columba first attempted to build a cathedral on Iona, the walls fell down as they were erected; he then received supernatural information that they would never stand unless a human victim was buried alive, and, in consequence, his companion, Oran, was interred at the foundation of the structure.[212] It is reported that, when not long ago the Bridge Gate of Bremen city walls was demolished, the skeleton of a child was found embedded in the groundwork;[213] and when the new bridge at Halle, finished in 1843, was building, "the common people fancied a child was wanted to be walled into the foundations."[214]
[Footnote 201: Sartori, 'Ueber das Bauopfer,' in _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, xxx. 5 _sqq._ Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 104 _sqq._ Baring-Gould, _Strange Survivals_, p. 4 _sqq._ Trumbull, _Threshold Covenant_, p. 46 _sqq._ Grant Allen, _Evolution of the Idea of God_, p. 249 _sqq._ Liebrecht, _Zur Volkskunde_, p. 284 _sqq._ Andree, _Ethnographische Parallelen_, p. 18 _sqq._ Nyrop, _Romanske Mosaiker_, p. 63 _sqq._ Krause, 'Das Bauopfer bei den Südslaven,' in _Mittheilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien_, xvii. 18 _sqq._ Wuttke, _Der deutsche Volksaberglaube der Gegenwart_, § 440, p. 300 _sq._]
[Footnote 202: Winternitz, 'Bemerkungen über das Bauopfer bei den Indern,' in _Mittheil. Anthr. Gesellsch. in Wien_, xvii. [37] _sqq._]
[Footnote 203: Wheeler, _History of India_, iv. 278.]
[Footnote 204: Grierson, _Bih[=a]r Peasant Life_, p. 4.]
[Footnote 205: Coote, 'A Building Superstition,' in _Folk-Lore Journal_, i. 23.]
[Footnote 206: Schmidt, _Volksleben der Neu-Griechen_, p. 197.]
[Footnote 207: Krauss, _loc. cit._ p. 19 _sqq._]
[Footnote 208: Ralston, _Songs of the Russian People_, p. 127.]
[Footnote 209: _Ibid._ p. 127. Krauss, _loc. cit._ p. 21.]
[Footnote 210: _Folk-Lore Record_, iii. 283.]
[Footnote 211: Nennius, _Historia Britonum_, Irish Version, ch. 18, p. 93.]
[Footnote 212: Gomme, 'Some Traditions and Superstitions connected with Buildings,' in _The Antiquary_, iii. 11. Carmichael, _Carmina Gadelica_, ii. 316.]
[Footnote 213: Baring-Gould, _Strange Survivals_, p. 5.]
[Footnote 214: Grimm, _Teutonic Mythology_, iii. 1142.]
It seems highly probable that the building-sacrifice, like other kinds of human sacrifice, is based on the idea of substitution. A new house or dwelling-place is commonly regarded as dangerous, a wall or a tower is liable to fall down and cause destruction of life, a bridge may break, or the person who crosses it may tumble into the water and be drowned. In the Babar Islands, before entering a new house, offerings are thrown inside, that the spirit, Orloo, may not make the {463} inmates ill.[215] Before the Sandwich Islanders could occupy their houses "offerings were made to the gods, and presents to the priest, who entered the house, uttered prayers, went through other ceremonies, and slept in it before the owner took possession, in order to prevent evil spirits from resorting to it, and to secure its inmates from the effects of incantation."[216] Among the Kayans of Borneo, on the occasion of the king or principal chief taking possession of a newly-built house, a human victim was killed, and the blood was sprinkled on the pillars and under the house.[217] The Russian peasant believes that the building of a new house "is apt to be followed by the death of the head of the family for which the new dwelling is constructed, or that the member of the family who is the first to enter it will soon die"; and, in accordance with a custom of great antiquity, the oldest member of a migrating household enters the new house first.[218] In German folk-tales "the first to cross the bridge, the first to enter the new building or the country, pays with his life."[219] Even nowadays, in the North of Europe, there is a wide-spread fear of being the first to enter a new building or of going over a newly-built bridge; "if to do this is not everywhere and in all cases thought to entail death, it is considered supremely unlucky."[220] This superstition has been interpreted as a survival of a previous sacrifice;[221] but there can be no doubt, I think, that the foundation sacrifice itself owes its origin to similar notions and fears of supernatural dangers. Uncultured people are commonly afraid of anything new, or of doing an act for the first time;[222] and, apart from this, the erecting of a new building is an intrusion upon {464} the land of the local spirit, and therefore likely to arouse its anger. There are houses which remain haunted by spirits all their time.[223] It is natural, then, that attempts should be made to avert the danger. And, human life being at stake, no preventive could be more effective than the offering up of a human victim.
[Footnote 215: Riedel, _De sluik- en kroesharige rassen tusschen Selebes en Papua_, p. 343.]
[Footnote 216: Ellis, _Polynesian Researches_, iv. 322.]
[Footnote 217: Burns, 'Kayans of the North-West of Borneo,' in _Journal of the Indian Archipelago_, iii. 145.]
[Footnote 218: Ralston, _Songs of the Russian People_, p. 126. _Cf._ Krauss, _loc. cit._ p. 21 _sq._ (Southern Slavs).]
[Footnote 219: Grimm, _Teutonic Mythology_, i. 45, n. 2.]
[Footnote 220: Baring-Gould, _Strange Survivals_, p. 2. For various instances of similar beliefs, see Sartori, in _Zeitschr. f. Ethnol._ xxx. 14 _sqq._; Crawley, _Mystic Rose_, p. 25.]
[Footnote 221: Baring-Gould, _op. cit._ p. 4.]
[Footnote 222: Crawley, _op. cit._ p. 25.]
[Footnote 223: Westermarck, 'Nature of the Arab _[vG]inn_, illustrated by the Present Beliefs of the People of Morocco,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxix. 253, 260.]
On the other hand it is maintained that the foundation-sacrifice is partly, if not exclusively, performed for the purpose of converting the soul of the victim into a protecting demon.[224] This opinion, no doubt, has the support of beliefs actually held by some of the peoples who practise the rite. When the gate of the new city of Tavoy, in Tenasserim, was built, Mason was told by an eye-witness that a criminal was put in each post-hole to become a guardian spirit.[225] The Burmese kings used to have victims buried alive at the gates of their capitals, "so that their spirits might watch over the city."[226] Formerly, in Siam, "when a new city gate was being erected, it was customary for a number of officers to lie in wait near the spot, and seize the first four or eight persons who happened to pass by, and who were then buried alive under the gate-posts, to serve as guardian angels."[227] But whatever be the present notions of certain peoples concerning the object of the building-sacrifice, I do not believe that its primary object could have been to procure a spirit-guardian. According to early ideas, the ghost of a murdered man is not a friendly being, and least of all is he kindly disposed towards those who killed him. Several instances are known in which later generations have put upon human sacrifices an interpretation obviously foreign to their original purpose.[228] Thus, according to a North {465} German tradition, a master-builder was immured by a certain knight in the tower which he had built, as a punishment for boasting that he could have built a still finer tower if he had liked to do so.[229] An Indian raja, we are told, was once building a bridge over the river Jargoat Chunâr, and when it fell down several times he was advised to sacrifice a Brahman girl to the local deity; however, "she has now become the Marî or ghost of the place, and is regularly worshipped in time of trouble."[230] Considering that the foundation-sacrifice was offered for the purpose of protecting the living against the attacks of the spirit of the place, it is quite intelligible that the ghost of the victim came in time to be looked upon as a guardian spirit; and it was all the more natural to attribute to the dead the function of a guard in cases where he was buried at the gate. But he was buried there, I presume, simply because that spot was thought to be the most dangerous. The gate of a town corresponds to the entrance of a house, and the threshold has almost universally been regarded as the proper haunt of what the Moors call "the owners of the place."[231]
[Footnote 224: Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 106. Grant Allen, _op. cit._ p. 248 _sqq._ Lippert, _Christenthum, Volksglaube und Volksbrauch_, p. 456 _sq._ _Idem_, _Kulturgeschichte der Menschheit_, ii. 270. Gaidoz, in _Mélusine_, iv. 14 _sqq._ Sartori, in _Zeitsthr. f. Ethnol._ xxx. 32 _sqq._]
[Footnote 225: Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 107.]
[Footnote 226: Woodthorpe, in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxvi. 24. See also Shway Yoe, _The Burman_, i. 286.]
[Footnote 227: Alabaster, _Wheel of the Law_, p. 212 _sq._ _Cf._ Gaidoz, _loc. cit._ p. 14 _sq._]
[Footnote 228: See Nyrop, _Romanske Mosaiker_, p. 73 _sqq._; also _infra_, p. 465 _sq._]
[Footnote 229: Nyrop, _op. cit._ p. 73.]
[Footnote 230: Crooke, _Popular Religion of Northern India_, ii. 174.]
[Footnote 231: See Trumbull, _Threshold Covenant_, _passim_.]
Whilst the man who is sacrificed is in some cases described as a guardian, he is in other cases regarded as a messenger. The Mayas of Yucatan maintained that the human victims whom they offered in times of distress were sent as messengers to the spirit-world to make known the wants of the people.[232] The same idea prevailed in Great Benin. When the head jujuman had said the prayer in which he asked Ogiwo to let no sickness come for Benin, he thus addressed the slaves who were going to be clubbed to death and tied in the sacrifice-trees:--"So you shall tell Ogiwo. Salute him proper."[233] A message was likewise sent to the head juju with the slave who was sacrificed to it;[234] and a message saluting the rain-god was put in the {466} mouth of the woman who was sacrificed when there was too much rain.[235] Mr. Ling Roth suggests that the main object of the human sacrifices which were offered in Benin "was the sending of prayers, by means of the special messengers, for the welfare of the community, to the spirits of the departed, or to other spirits, such as the spirits of the beads, the Rain-God, Sun-God, the God-Ogiwo"; and he thinks that this explains "a cult of world-wide prevalence."[236] But considering that in Yucatan and Benin, as elsewhere, the human victim was sacrificed for the avowed purpose of averting some mortal danger from the community or the king, I conclude that there, also, the primary object of the rite was to offer a substitute, though this substitute came to be used as a messenger.
[Footnote 232: Dorman, _op. cit._ p. 213.]
[Footnote 233: Moor and Roupell, quoted by Read and Dalton, _op. cit._ p. 7; also by Ling Roth, _Great Benin_, p. 72.]
[Footnote 234: _Supra_, p. 456.]
[Footnote 235: _Supra_, p. 444.]
[Footnote 236: Ling Roth, _op. cit._ p. 72.]
I do not affirm that the practice of human sacrifice is in every case based on the idea of substitution; the notion that a certain god has a desire for such sacrifices may no doubt induce his worshippers to gratify this desire for a variety of purposes. But I think there is sufficient evidence to prove that, when men offer the lives of their fellow-men in sacrifice to their gods, they do so as a rule in the hopes of thereby saving their own. Human sacrifice is essentially a method of life-insurance--absurd, no doubt, according to our ideas, but not an act of wanton cruelty. When practised for the benefit of the community or in a case of national distress, it is hardly more cruel than to advocate the infliction of capital punishment on the ground of social expediency, or to compel thousands of men to suffer death on the battle-field on behalf of their country. The custom of human sacrifice admits that the life of one is taken to save the lives of many, or that an inferior individual is put to death for the purpose of preventing the death of somebody who has a higher right to live. Sometimes the king or chief is sacrificed in times of scarcity or pestilence, but then he is probably held personally responsible for the calamity.[237] Very frequently {467} the victims are prisoners of war or other aliens, or slaves, or criminals, that is, persons whose lives are held in little regard. And in many cases these are the only victims allowed by custom.
[Footnote 237: Frazer, _Golden Bough_, i. 15 _sq._]
This was generally the case among the ancient Teutons,[238] though they sometimes deemed a human sacrifice the more efficacious the more distinguished the victim, and the nearer his relationship to him who offered the sacrifice.[239] The Gauls, says Cæsar, "consider that the oblation of such as have been taken in theft, or robbery, or any other offence, is more acceptable to the immortal gods; but when a supply of that class is wanting, they have recourse to the oblation of even the innocent."[240] Diodorus Siculus states that the Carthaginians in former times used to sacrifice to Saturn the sons of the most eminent persons, but that, of later times, they secretly bought and bred up children for that purpose.[241] The chief aim of the wars of the ancient Mexicans was to make prisoners for sacrificial purposes; other victims were slaves who were purchased for this object, and many criminals "who were condemned to expiate their crimes by the sacrifice of their lives."[242] The Yucatans sacrificed captives taken in war, and only if such victims were wanting they dedicated their children to the altar "rather than let the gods be deprived of their due."[243] In Guatemala the victims were slaves or captives or, among the Pipiles, illegitimate children from six to twelve years old who belonged to the tribe.[244] In Florida the human victim who was offered up at harvest time was chosen from among the Spaniards wrecked on the coast.[245] Of the Peruvian Indians before the time of the Incas, Garcilasso de la Vega states that, "besides ordinary things such as animals and maize, they sacrificed men and women of all ages, being captives taken in wars which they made against each other."[246] Among the Tshi-speaking peoples of the Gold Coast, "the persons ordinarily sacrificed to the gods are prisoners of war or slaves. When the latter, they are usually aliens, as a protecting god is not so well satisfied with the sacrifice of his own people."[247] In Great Benin, according to Captain Roupell, the people who were kept for sacrifice were bad men, or men with bad sickness, {468} and they were all slaves.[248] In Fiji the victims were generally prisoners of war, but sometimes they were slaves procured by purchase from other tribes.[249] In Nukahiva "the custom of the country requires that the men destined for sacrifice should belong to some neighbouring nation, and accordingly they are generally stolen."[250] In Tahiti "the unhappy wretches selected were either captives taken in war, or individuals who had rendered themselves obnoxious to the chiefs or the priests.**"[251] The Muruts of Borneo "never sacrifice one of their own people, but either capture an individual of a hostile tribe, or send to a friendly tribe to purchase a slave for the purpose."[252] It is said to be contrary to the Káyán custom to sell or sacrifice one of their own nation.[253] The G[=a]ro hill tribes "generally select their victims out of the Bengali villages in the plains."[254] The Kandhs considered that the victim must be a stranger. "If we spill our own blood," they said, "we shall have no descendants";[255] and even the children of Meriahs, who were reared for sacrificial purposes, were never offered up in the village of their birth.[256]
[Footnote 238: Grimm, _Teutonic Mythology_, i. 45.]
[Footnote 239: Holtzmann, _Deutsche Mythologie_, p. 232.]
[Footnote 240: Cæsar, _De bello gallico_, vi. 16.]
[Footnote 241: Diodorus Siculus, xx. 14.]
[Footnote 242: Clavigero, _op. cit._ i. 282.]
[Footnote 243: Bancroft, _op. cit._ ii. 704.]
[Footnote 244: Stoll, _op. cit._ p. 40.]
[Footnote 245: Bry, _op. cit._ p. 11.]
[Footnote 246: Garcilasso de la Vega, _op. cit._ i. 50.]
[Footnote 247: Ellis, _Tshi-speaking Peoples_, p. 170.]
[Footnote 248: Ling Roth, _Great Benin_, p. 70.]
[Footnote 249: Hale, _U.S. Exploring Expedition. Vol. VI. Ethnography and Philology_, p. 57. _Cf._ Wilkes, _op. cit._ iii. 97.]
[Footnote 250: Lisiansky, _op. cit._ p. 81 _sq._]
[Footnote 251: Ellis, _Polynesian Researches_, i. 346.]
[Footnote 252: Denison, quoted by Ling Roth, _Natives of Sarawak_, ii. 216.]
[Footnote 253: Burns, in _Jour. of Indian Archipelago_, iii. 145.]
[Footnote 254: Godwin-Austen, in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ ii. 394.]
[Footnote 255: Macpherson, _Memorials of Service in India_, p. 121.]
[Footnote 256: Campbell, _Wild Tribes of Khondistan_, p. 53.]
We find that various peoples who at a certain period have been addicted to the practice of human sacrifice, have afterwards, at a more advanced stage of civilisation, voluntarily given it up. The cause of this is partly an increase, or expansion, of the sympathetic sentiment, partly a change of ideas. With the growth of enlightenment men would lose faith in this childish method of substitution, and consequently find it not only useless, but objectionable; and any sentimental disinclination to the practice would by itself, in the course of time, lead to the belief that the deity no longer cares for it, or is averse to it. Brahmanism gradually abolished the immolation of human victims, incompatible as it was with the precept of _ahimsâ_, or respect for everything that has life; "the liberation of the victim, or the substitution in its stead and place of a {469} figure made of flour paste, both of which were at first matter of sufferance, became at length matter of requirement."[257] According to the Mahabharata, the priest who performs a human sacrifice is cast into hell.[258] In Greece, in the historic age, the practice was held in horror at least by all the better minds, though it was regarded as necessary on certain occasions.[259] It was strongly condemned by enlightened Romans. Cicero speaks of it as a "monstrous and barbarous practice" still disgracing Gaul in his day;[260] and Pliny, referring to the steps taken by Tiberius to stop it, declares it impossible to estimate the debt of the world to the Romans for their efforts to put it down.[261]
[Footnote 257: Barth, _Religions of India_, p. 97.]
[Footnote 258: _Supra_, p. 458.]
[Footnote 259: Stengel, _op. cit._ p. 117. _Cf._ Donaldson, _loc. cit._ p. 464.]
[Footnote 260: Cicero, _Pro Fonteio_, 10 (21).]
[Footnote 261: Pliny, _Historia naturalis_, xxx. 4 (1).]
The growing reluctance to offer human sacrifice led to various practices intended to replace it.[262] Speaking of the Italian custom of dedicating as a sacrifice to the gods every creature that should be born in the following spring, Festus adds that, since it seemed cruel to kill innocent boys and girls, they were kept till they had grown up, then veiled and driven beyond the boundaries.[263] Among various peoples human effigies or animals were offered instead of men.
[Footnote 262: _Cf._ Krause, 'Die Ablösung der Menschenopfer,' in _Kosmos_, 1878, iii. 76 _sqq._]
[Footnote 263: Festus, _op. cit._ 'Ver sacrum,' p. 379.]
Among the Malays of the Malay Peninsula dough models of human beings, actually called "the substitutes," are offered up to the spirits on the sacrificial trays; and in the same sense are the directions of magicians, that "if the spirit craves a human victim a cock may be substituted."[264] We are told that, in Egypt, King Amosis ordered three waxen images to be burned in the temple of Heliopolis in lieu of the three men who in earlier times used to be sacrificed there.[265] The Romans offered dolls;[266] and in old Hindu families belonging to the sect of the Vámácháris a practice still obtains of sacrificing an effigy {470} instead of a living man.[267] In India, Greece, and Rome, animals, also, were substituted for human victims.[268] Of a similar substitution there is probably a trace in the Biblical story of Isaac being exchanged for a ram, and in the paschal sacrifice.[269] On the Gold Coast the human victim who was formerly sacrificed to the god of the Prah is nowadays replaced by a bullock which is specially reserved and fattened for the purpose.[270]
[Footnote 264: Skeat, _Malay Magic_, p. 72.]
[Footnote 265: Porphyry, _op. cit._ ii. 55.]
[Footnote 266: Leist, _Græco-italische Rechtsgeschichte_, p. 272 _sqq._]
[Footnote 267: Rájendralála Mitra, _op. cit._ ii. 109 _sq._]
[Footnote 268: Leist, _Græco-italische Rechtsgeschichte_, p. 267 _sqq._ Frazer, _Golden Bough_, ii. 38, n. 2. Pausanias, ix. 8. 2. For various modifications of human sacrifice in India, see Wilson, _Works_, ii. 267 _sq._; Crooke, _Popular Religion of Northern India_, ii. 175 _sq._]
[Footnote 269: See _supra_, p. 458.]
[Footnote 270: Ellis, _Tshi-speaking Peoples_, p. 66.]
In other cases human sacrifices have been succeeded by practices involving the effusion of human blood without loss of life. We are told that, in Laconia, Lycurgus established the scourging of lads at the altar of Artemis Orthia, in place of the sacrifice of men, which had previously been offered to her;[271] and Euripides represents Athena as ordaining that, when the people celebrate the festival of Artemis the Taurian goddess, the priest, to compensate her for the sacrifice of Orestes, "must hold his knife to a human throat, and blood must flow to satisfy the sacred claims of the goddess, that she may have her honours."[272] There are also many instances of bleeding or mutilation practised for the same purpose as human sacrifice, probably according to the principle of _pars pro toto_, though it is impossible to decide whether they really are survivals of an earlier sacrifice.
[Footnote 271: Pausanias, ix. 16. 10.]
[Footnote 272: Euripides, _Iphigenia in Tauris_, 1458 _sqq._]
Besides the ceremony of _nawgia_, already described,[273] the Tonga Islanders had another ceremony called _tootoo-nima_, or cutting off a portion of the little finger, as a sacrifice to the gods, for the recovery of a superior relation who was ill; and so commonly was this done that, in Mariner's days, there was scarcely a person living in the Tonga Islands who had not lost one or both little fingers, or at least a considerable portion of them.[274] In Chinese literature there are frequently mentioned instances of persons cutting off flesh from their bodies to cure parents or paternal grandparents dangerously ill. In most cases {471} it remains unmentioned how the flesh was prepared; but it is sometimes stated that porridge or broth was made of it, or that it was mixed with medicine. Dr. de Groot maintains that it was in the first place the ascription of therapeutic virtues to parts of the human body that prompted such filial self-mutilation. But he adds that "often also we read of thigh-cutters invoking Heaven beforehand, solemnly asking this highest power to accept their own bodies as a substitute for the patients' lives they wanted to save; their mutilation thus assuming the character of self-immolation."[275] According to the testimony of a native writer, there is scarcely a respectable house in all Bengal, the mistress of which has not at one time or other shed her blood, under the notion of satisfying the goddess Chandiká by the operation. "Whenever her husband or a son is dangerously ill, a vow is made that on the recovery of the patient, the goddess would be regaled with human blood. . . . The lady performs certain ceremonies, and then bares her breast in the presence of the goddess, and with a nail-cutter (_naruna_) draws a few drops of blood from between her breasts and offers them to the divinity."[276] Garcilasso de la Vega states that, whilst some of the Peruvian Indians before the time of the Incas sacrificed men, there were others who, though they mixed human blood in their sacrifices, did not obtain it by killing anyone, but by bleeding the arms and legs, according to the importance of the sacrifice, and, in the most solemn cases, by bleeding the root of the nose where it is joined by the eyebrows.[277]
[Footnote 273: _Supra_, p. 455.]
[Footnote 274: Mariner, _op. cit._ ii. 222.]
[Footnote 275: de Groot, _Religious System of China_, (vol, iv. book) ii. 386 _sq._]
[Footnote 276: Rájendralála Mitra, _op. cit._ i. 111 _sq._]
[Footnote 277: Garcilasso de la Vega, _op. cit._ i. 52.]
There is one form of human sacrifice which has outlived all others, namely, the penal sacrifice of offenders. There can be no moral scruples in regard to a rite which involves a punishment regarded as just. Indeed, this kind of human sacrifice is even found where the offering of animals or lifeless things has fallen out of use or become a mere symbol. For this is the only sacrifice which is intended to propitiate the deity by the mere death of the victim; and gods are believed to be capable of feeling anger and revenge long after they have ceased to have material needs. The last trace of human sacrifice has {472} disappeared only when men no longer punish offenders capitally with a view to appeasing resentful gods.
* * * * *
Human beings are sacrificed not only to gods, but to dead men, in order to serve them as companions or servants, or to vivify their spirits, or to gratify their craving for revenge.
From various quarters of the world we hear of the immolation of men for the service of the dead, the victims generally being slaves, wives, or captives of war, or, sometimes, friends.[278] This rite occurs or has occurred, more or less extensively, in Borneo[279] and the Philippine Islands,[280] in Melanesia and Polynesia,[281] in many different parts of Africa,[282] and among some American tribes.[283] In America, however, it was carried to its height by the more civilised nations of Central America and Mexico, Bogota and Peru.[284] There is evidence to show that the funeral ceremonies {473} of the ancient Egyptians occasionally included human sacrifice at the gate of the tomb, although the practice would seem to have been exceptional, at any rate after Egypt had entered upon her period of greatness.[285] It has been suggested that in China the burial of living persons with the dead dates from the darkest mist of ages, and that the cases on record in the native books are of relatively modern date only because in high antiquity the custom was so common, that it did not occur to the annalists and chroniclers to set down such everyday matters as anything remarkable.[286] In the fourteenth century of our era, the funeral sacrifice of men was abolished, even for emperors and members of the imperial family,[287] but it has assumed a modified shape under which it still maintains itself in China. "Daughters, daughters-in-law, and widows especially imbued with the doctrine that they are the property of their dead parents, parents-in-law, and husbands, and accordingly owe them the highest degree of submissive devotion, often take their lives, in order to follow them into the next world." And though it has been enacted that no official distinctions shall be awarded to such suttees, whereas honours are granted to widowed wives, concubines, and brides who, instead of destroying themselves, simply abjure matrimonial life for good, sutteeism of widows and brides still meets with the same applause as ever, and many a woman is no doubt prevailed upon, or even compelled, by her own relations, to become a suttee.[288] Professor Schrader observes that "it is no longer possible to doubt that ancient Indo-Germanic custom ordained that the wife should die with her husband."[289] It has been argued, it is true, that the burning of widows begins rather late in India;[290] yet, though the modern ordinance of suttee-burning be a corrupt departure {474} from the early Brahmanic ritual, the practice seems to be, not a new invention by the later Hindu priesthood, but the revival of an ancient rite belonging originally to a period even earlier than the Veda.[291] In the Vedic ritual there are ceremonies which obviously indicate the previous existence of such a rite.[292] From Greece we have the instances of Evadne throwing herself into the funeral pile of her husband,[293] and of the suicide of the three Messenian widows mentioned by Pausanias.[294] Sacrifice of widows occurred, as it seems as a regular custom, among the Scandinavians,[295] Heruli,[296] and Slavonians.[297] "The fact," says Mr. Ralston, "that, in Slavonic lands, a thousand years ago, widows used to destroy themselves in order to accompany their dead husbands to the world of spirits, seems to rest on incontestable evidence"; and if the dead was a man of means and distinction, he was also solaced by the sacrifice of his slaves.[298] Funeral offerings of slaves occurred among the Teutons[299] and the Gauls of Cæsar's time;[300] and in the Iliad we read of twelve captives being laid on the funeral pile of Patroclus.[301]
[Footnote 278: See Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 458 _sqq._; Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, i. 203 _sqq._; Liebrecht, _Zur Volkskunde_, p. 380 _sq._; Schneider, _Naturvölker_, i. 202 _sqq._; Hehn, _op. cit._ p. 416 _sqq._; Westermarck, _History of Human Marriage_, p. 125 _sq._; Frazer, _Pausanias_, iii. 199 _sq._]
[Footnote 279: Brooke, _Ten Years in Saráwak_, i. 74. Hose and McDougall, 'Relations between Men and Animals in Sarawak,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxxi. 207 _sq._ Bock, _Head-Hunters of Borneo_, pp. 210 n., 219 _sq._]
[Footnote 280: Blumentritt, 'Der Ahnencultus und die religiösen Anschauungen der Malaien des Philippinen Archipels,' in _Mittheilungen d. Geograph. Gesellsch. in Wien_, xxv. 152 _sq._]
[Footnote 281: Westermarck, _op. cit._ p. 125 _sq._ Brenchley, _op. cit._ p. 208 (natives of Tana). Williams and Calvert, _op. cit._ p. 161 _sq._ (Fijians). Lisiansky, _op. cit._ p. 81 (Nukahivans). Mariner, _op. cit._ ii. 220 _sq._ (Tonga Islanders). Taylor, _Te Ika a Maui_, p. 218 (Maoris). von Kotzebue, _op. cit._ iii. 247 (Sandwich Islanders).]
[Footnote 282: Rowley, _Africa Unveiled_, p. 127. _Idem_, _Religion of the Africans_, p. 102 _sq._ Schneider, _Religion der afrikanischen Naturvölker_, p. 118 _sqq._ Westermarck, _op. cit._ p. 125. Ramseyer and Kühne, _Four Years in Ashantee_, p. 50. Mockler-Ferryman, _British Nigeria_, pp. 235, 259 _sqq._ Burton, _Mission to Gelele_, ii. 19 _sqq._ (Dahomans). _Idem_, _Abeokuta_, i. 220 _sq._ _Idem_, _Lake Regions of Central Africa_, i. 124 (Wadoe); ii. 25 _sq._ (Wanyamwezi). Wilson, _Western Africa_, pp. 203, 219. Ellis, _Tshi-speaking Peoples of the Gold Coast_, p. 159 _sqq._ _Idem_, _E[(w]e-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast_, pp. 117, 118, 121 _sqq._ Nachtigal, _Sahara und Sudan_, ii. 687 (Somraï and Njillem). Baker, _Ismaïlia_, p. 317 _sq._ (Wanyoro). Casati, _Ten Years in Equatoria_, i. 170 (Mambettu). Callaway, _Religious System of the Amazulu_, p. 212 _sq._]
[Footnote 283: Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, i. 204. Dorman, _op. cit._ p. 210 _sqq._ Westermarck, _op. cit._ p. 125. Macfie, _Vancouver Island and British Columbia_, p. 448. Charlevoix, _Voyage to North America_, ii. 196 _sq._ (Natchez). Rochefort, _Histoire naturelle et morale des Iles Antilles_, p. 568 _sq._ (Caribs).]
[Footnote 284: Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 461. Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, i. 205. Dorman, _op. cit._ p. 212 _sqq._ Acosta, _op. cit._ ii. 313, 314, 344 (Peruvians).]
[Footnote 285: Wiedemann, _Ancient Egyptian Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul_, p. 62 n.]
[Footnote 286: de Groot, _op. cit._ (vol. ii. book) i. 721.]
[Footnote 287: _Ibid._ (vol. ii. book) i. 724.]
[Footnote 288: _Ibid._ (vol. ii. book) i. 735, 754, 748.]
[Footnote 289: Schrader, _Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples_, p. 391.]
[Footnote 290: Hopkins, _op. cit._ p. 274.]
[Footnote 291: Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 465 _sqq._ Zimmer, _Altindisches Leben_, p. 331.]
[Footnote 292: _Rig-Veda_, x. 18. 8 _sq._ Macdonell, _Vedic Mythology_, p. 165. Hillebrandt, 'Eine Miscelle aus dem Vedaritual,' in _Zeitschr. d. Deutschen Morgenländ. Gesellsch._ xl. 711. Oldenberg, _Religion des Veda_, p. 587.]
[Footnote 293: Euripides, _Supplices_, 1000 _sqq._]
[Footnote 294: Pausanias, iv. 2. 7.]
[Footnote 295: Grimm, _Deutsche Rechtsalterthümer_, p. 451.]
[Footnote 296: Procopius, _op. cit._ ii. 14.]
[Footnote 297: Dithmar of Merseburg, _Chronicon_, viii. 2 (Pertz, _Monumenta Germaniæ historica_, v. 861). Zimmer, _op. cit._ p. 330.]
[Footnote 298: Ralston, _Songs of the Russian People_, p. 327 _sq._]
[Footnote 299: Grimm, _op. cit._ p. 344.]
[Footnote 300: Cæsar, _De bello gallico_, vi. 19. In the ancient annals of the Irish there is one trace of human sacrifice being offered as a funeral rite (Cusack, _History of the Irish Nation_, p. 115 n.*).]
[Footnote 301: _Iliad_, xxiii. 175.]
According to early notions, men require wives and servants not only during their life-time, but after their death. The surviving relatives want to satisfy their needs, out of affection or from fear of withholding from the dead what belongs to them--their wives and their slaves. The destruction of innocent life seems justified by the low social standing of the victims and their subjection to their husbands or masters. However, with advancing civilisation this sacrifice has a tendency to {475} disappear, partly, perhaps, on account of a change of ideas as regards the state after death, but chiefly, I presume, because it becomes revolting to public feelings. It then dwindles into a survival. As a probable instance of this may be mentioned a custom prevalent among the Tacullies of North America: the widow is compelled by the kinsfolk of the deceased to lie on the funeral pile where the body of her husband is placed, whilst the fire is lighting, until the heat becomes intolerable.[302] In ancient Egypt little images of clay, or wood, or stone, or bronze, made in human likeness and inscribed with a certain formula, were placed within the tomb, presumably in the hopes that they would there attain to life and become the useful servants of the dead.[303] So also the Japanese[304] and Chinese, already in early times, placed images in, or at, the tombs of their dead as substitutes for human victims; and these images have always been considered to have no less virtual existence in the next world than living servitors, wives, or concubines. In China the original immolations were, moreover, replaced by the custom of allowing the nearest relatives and slaves of the deceased simply to settle on the tomb, instead of entering it, there to sacrifice to the manes, and by prohibiting widows from remarrying.[305]
[Footnote 302: Wilkes, _U.S. Exploring Expedition_, iv. 453.]
[Footnote 303: Wiedemann, _Ancient Egyptian Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul_, p. 63.]
[Footnote 304: Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, i. 463.]
[Footnote 305: de Groot, _op. cit._ (vol. ii. book) i. 794 _sqq._]
The practice of sacrificing human beings to the dead is not exclusively based on the idea that they require servants and companions. It is extremely probable that the funeral sacrifice of men and animals in many cases involves an intention to vivify the spirits of the deceased with the warm, red sap of life.[306] This seems to be the meaning of the Dahoman custom of pouring blood over the graves of the ancestors of the king.[307] So, also, in Ashanti "human sacrifices are frequent and ordinary, to {476} water the graves of the Kings."[308] In the German folk-tale known under the name of 'Faithful John,' the statue said to the King, "If you, with your own hand, cut off the heads of both your children, and sprinkle me with their blood, I shall be brought to life again."[309] According to primitive ideas, blood is life; to receive blood is to receive life; the soul of the dead wants to live, and consequently loves blood. The shades in Hades are eager to drink the blood of Odysseus' sacrifice, that their life may be renewed for a time.[310] And it is all the more important that the soul should get what it desires as it otherwise may come and attack the living. The belief that the bloodless shades leave their graves at night and seek renewed life by drawing the blood of the living, is prevalent in many parts of the world.[311] As late as the eighteenth century this belief caused an epidemic of fear in Hungary, resulting in a general disinterment, and the burning or staking of the suspected bodies.[312] It is also possible that the mutilations and self-bleedings which accompany funerals are partly practised for the purpose of refreshing the departed soul.[313] The Samoans called it "an offering of blood" for the dead when the mourners beat their heads with stones till the blood ran.[314]
[Footnote 306: _Cf._ Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, i. 288 _sq._; Rockholz, _Deutscher Glaube und Brauch_, i. 55; Sepp, _Völkerbrauch bei Hochzeit, Geburt und Tod_, p. 154; Trumbull, _Blood Covenant_, p. 110 _sqq._]
[Footnote 307: Reade, _Savage Africa_, p. 51 _sq._]
[Footnote 308: Bowdich, _Mission from Cape Castle to Ashantee_, p. 289.]
[Footnote 309: Grimm, _Kinder- und Hausmärchen_, p. 29 _sq._]
[Footnote 310: _Odyssey_, xi. 153.]
[Footnote 311: Trumbull, _Blood Covenant_, p. 114 _sq._]
[Footnote 312: Farrer, _Primitive Manners and Customs_, p. 23 _sq._]
[Footnote 313: _Cf._ Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, i. 181 _sq._]
[Footnote 314: Turner, _Nineteen Years in Polynesia_, p. 227.]
Finally, as offenders are sacrificed to gods in order to appease their wrath, so manslayers are in many cases killed in order to satisfy their victims' craving for revenge. In the next chapter we shall see that the execution of blood-revenge largely falls under the heading of "human sacrifice for the dead."
CHAPTER XX
BLOOD-REVENGE AND COMPENSATION--THE PUNISHMENT OF DEATH
ACCORDING to early custom, a person who takes the life of another may himself be killed by the relatives of his victim, or some other member of his family, clan, or tribe may be killed in his stead.[1] The custom of blood-revenge is found among a host of existing savages and barbarians, and has long survived among many peoples who have reached a higher degree of culture.
[Footnote 1: The collective responsibility usually involved in the blood-feud has been discussed _supra_, p. 30 _sqq._]
We meet with blood-revenge in the midst of Japanese civilisation, not as a mere fact, but as a legally permitted custom. The avenger had only to observe certain prescribed formalities and regulations: there was a regular official to whom he must announce his resolve, and he must fix the time within which he would carry it out. The way in which the enemy was killed was of no importance, except that, even in ancient times, the man who had recourse to assassination was reprehensible.[2] Among the Hebrews blood-revenge continued to exist during the periods of the Judges and Kings, and even later; under the Old Kingdom, says Wellhausen, "the administration of justice was at best but a scanty supplement to the practice of self-help."[3] It is a rule among {478} all the Arabs that whoever sheds the blood of a man owes blood on that account to the family of the slain person.[4] Says the Koran:--"O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you for the slain."[5] In ancient Eran blood-revenge survived the establishment of tribunals.[6] There is evidence left of its prevalence in early times among the Aryan population of India, though no mention is made in the Sûtras of blood revenge as an existing custom.[7] Among the Greeks it was only in the post-Homeric age that it was given up as a fundamental principle, the avenger being transformed into an accuser.[8] In Gaul and Ireland, though justice was administered by Druids or Brehons, their judgments seem to have been merely awards founded upon a submission to arbitration, the injured person being at liberty to take the law into his own hands and redress himself.[9] In the preface to the Senchus Mór we read that retaliation prevailed in Erin before Patrick, and that Patrick brought forgiveness with him.[10] Among the clans of Scotland, as is well known, the blood-feud has existed up to quite modern times; in the Catholic period even the Church recognised its power by leaving the right hand of male children unchristened, that it might deal the more unhallowed and deadly a blow to the enemy.[11] In England it was at least theoretically possible down to the middle of the tenth century for a manslayer to elect to bear the feud of the kindred of the slain, instead of paying the _wer_;[12] and long after the Conquest we still meet with a law against the system of {479} private revenge.[13] In Frisland, Lower Saxony, and parts of Switzerland, the blood-feud was practised as late as the sixteenth century.[14] In Italy it prevailed extensively, even among the upper classes, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.[15] In Corsica,[16] Albania,[17] and Montenegro,[18] it exists even to this day.
[Footnote 2: Rein, _Japan_, p. 326. Dautremer, 'The Vendetta or Legal Revenge in Japan,' in _Trans. Asiatic Soc. Japan_, xiii. 84 _sq._]
[Footnote 3: Wellhausen, _Prolegomena to the History of Israel_, p. 467.]
[Footnote 4: Burckhardt, _Notes on the Bedouins and Wahábys_, p. 85.]
[Footnote 5: _Koran_, ii. 173. _Cf._ _ibid._ xvii. 35.]
[Footnote 6: Geiger, _Civilization of the Eastern Ir[=a]nians_, ii. 31 _sqq._]
[Footnote 7: Leist, _Alt-arisches Jus Gentium_, p. 422.]
[Footnote 8: _Idem_, _Græco-italische Rechtsgeschichte_, § 50 _sq._, especially pp. 375, 381. In Rome blood-revenge appears to have been very early suppressed. There is an echo of it in certain legends, but even in them it is represented as objectionable (Mommsen, _History of Rome_, i. 190).]
[Footnote 9: Maine, _Early History of Institutions_, lect. ii. d'Arbois de Jubainville, 'Des attributions judiciaires de l'autorité publique chez les Celtes,' in _Revue Celtique_, vii. 5. _Ancient Laws of Ireland_, iii. p. lxxxix.]
[Footnote 10: Skene, _Celtic Scotland_, iii. 152.]
[Footnote 11: Mackintosh, _History of Civilisation in Scotland_, ii. 279.]
[Footnote 12: Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law before the Time of Edward I._ i. 48.]
[Footnote 13: Cherry, _Growth of Criminal Law in Ancient Communities_, p. 85.]
[Footnote 14: Günther, _Idee der Wiedervergeltung_, i. 207 _sq._ Frauenstädt, _Blutrache und Todtschlagsühne im Deutschen Mittelalter_, p. 21. _Cf._ Arnold, _Deutsche Urzeit_, p. 342.]
[Footnote 15: Simonde de Sismondi, _Histoire des républiques italiennes du moyen âge_, xvi. 456.]
[Footnote 16: Gregorovius, _Wanderings in Corsica_, i. 176 _sqq._]
[Footnote 17: Gop[vc]evi['c], _Oberalbanien und seine Liga_, p. 322 _sqq._]
[Footnote 18: Kohl, _Reise nach Istrien_, i. 406 _sqq._ Popovi['c], _Recht und Gericht in Montenegro_, p. 69.]