2 and filth."1 In many parts of Morocco, a man who has slain another person is never afterwards allowed to kill the sacrificial sheep at the "Great Feast." When David had in his heart to build a temple, God said to him, "Thou shalt not build a house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and has shed blood." 3 A decree of the penitential discipline of the Christian Church, which was enforced even against emperors and generals, forbade anyone whose hands had been imbrued in blood to approach the altar without a preparatory period of penance.* Whilst, from fear of contaminating anything holy, casual restrictions have thus been imposed on all kinds of manslayers, whether murderers or those who have killed an enemy in righteous warfare, more stringent rules have been laid down for persons permanently connected with the religious cult. Adair states that the "holy men" of the North American Indians, like the Jewish priests, were by their function absolutely forbidden to shed human blood, "notwithstanding their propensity thereto, even for small injuries." Herodotus says of the Persian Magi that they "kill animals of all kinds with their own hands, excepting dogs and men."" The Druids of Gaul never went to war, probably in order to keep themselves free from blood-pollution; it is true, they sacrificed human victims to their gods, but those they burnt. To the same class of facts belong those decrees of the Christian Church which forbade clergymen taking part in a battle. Moreover, if a Christian priest passed a sentence of death 1 Iliad, vi. 266 sqq. Cf. Vergil, Eneis, ii. 717 sqq. 2 I found this custom prevalent both among Arab and Berber tribes in different parts of the country; see my article, "The Popular Ritual of the Great Feast in Morocco," in Folk-Lore, xxii. 144. 1 Chronicles, xxviii. 2 sq. 4 Lecky, History of European Morals, ii. 39. 6 Adair, op. cit. p. 152. 6 Herodotus, i. 40. The Shluh of Southern Morocco and some other Berber tribes, in the central parts of the same country, consider that not only homicide, but the killing of a dog for ever after prevents a person from performing sacrifice at the "Great Feast"; see Folk-Lore, xxii. 144. 7 Cæsar, De bello gallico, vi. 14. 8 d'Arbois de Jubainville, Civilisation des Celtes, p. 254. 9 Cæsar, De bello gallico, vi. 16. 1 3 he was punished with degradation and imprisonment for life; nor was he allowed to write or dictate anything with a view to bringing about such a sentence.2 He must not perform a surgical operation by help of fire or iron. And if he killed a robber in order to save his life, he had to do penance till his death. The hands which had to distribute the blood of the Lamb of God were not to be polluted with the blood of those for whose salvation it was shed.5 It cannot be doubted that this horror of blood-pollution had a share in that regard for human life which from the beginning, and especially in early times, was a characteristic of Christianity. But in other respects also, Christian feelings and beliefs had an inherent tendency to evoke such a sentiment. The cosmopolitan spirit of the Christian religion could not allow, in theory at least, that the life of a man was less sacred because he was a foreigner. The extraordinary importance it attached to this earthly life as a preparation for a life to come naturally increased the guilt of any one who, by cutting it short, not only killed the body, but probably to all eternity injured the soul. In a still higher degree than most other crimes, homicide was regarded as an offence against God, because man had been made in His image. Gratian says that even the slayer of a Jew or a heathen has to undergo a severe penance, "quia imaginem Dei et spem futuræ conversionis exterminat. 978 1 Gratian, Decretum, ii. 23. 8. 30. 2 Concilium Lateranense IV., A.D. 1215, ch. 18 (Labbe-Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum collectio, xxii. 1007). 3 Concilium Lateranense IV., A.D. 1215, ch. 18 (Labbe-Mansi, op. cit. xxii. 1007). 4 Thomassin, Dictionnaire de discipline ecclésiastique, ii. 1074. 5 Ibid. ii. 1069. 6 Concilium Lugdunense I., A.D. 1245, Additio, de Homicidio (Labb.Mansi, op. cit. xxiii. 670). 7 von Eicken, Geschichte und System der Mittelalterlichen Weltanschauung, p. 568. Gratian, Decretum, i. 50. 40. CHAPTER XVII THE KILLING OF PARENTS, SICK PERSONS, CHILDREN FETICIDE We have found that among mankind at large there is a moral rule which forbids people to kill members of their own society. We shall now see that the stringency of this rule is subject to variations, depending on the special relationship in which persons stand to one another or on their social status, and that there are cases to which it does not apply at all. Owing to the regard which children are expected to feel for their parents, parricide is considered the most aggravated form of murder. Nowhere have parents 'been more venerated by their children than among the nations of archaic culture, and nowhere has parricide been regarded with greater horror. In China it is punished with the most ignominious of all capital punishments, the so-called "cutting into small pieces"; and in some instances, when the crime has occurred in a district, in addition to all punishments inflicted on persons, the wall of the city where the deed was committed is pulled down in parts, or modified in shape, a round corner is substituted for a square one, or a gate removed to a new situation, or even closed up altogether.1 In Corea the parricide is burned to death.2 1 Doolittle, Social Life of the Chinese, teristics, p. 229. i. 338 sq. 2 Smith, Chinese Charac- Griffis, Corea, p. 236. was Among the ancient Egyptians, we are told, he sentenced to be lacerated with sharpened reeds, and after being thrown on thorns he was burned.' In Exodus we read of the "smiting" of parents, but parricide is not expressly mentioned, perhaps because the Hebrew legislator, like Solon at Athens, did not think it possible that any one could be guilty of so unnatural a barbarity. Herodotus states that the same notion was held by the ancient Persians, who said that no one ever yet killed his own father or mother, and that all cases of so-called parricide if carefully examined, would be found to have been committed by supposititious children or those born in adultery, it being beyond the bounds of probability that a true father should be murdered by his own son.* Plato says in his 'Laws':-"If a man could be slain more than once, most justly would he who in a fit of passion has slain father or mother undergo many deaths. How can he whom, alone of all men, even in defence of his life, and when about to suffer death at the hands of his parents, no law will allow to kill his father or his mother who are the authors of his being, and whom the legislator will command to endure any extremity rather than do this-how can he, I say, lawfully receive any other punishment?" At Athens parricides were the only persons accused of murder who were not allowed the chance of escaping before sentence was passed, but were instantly arrested. According to Roman Law, a committer of parricidium was not subjected to any of the regular modes of capital punishment, but for "the most execrable of crimes. was provided "the most strange of punishments." The criminal was sewn up in a leathern sack with a cur, a cock, a viper, and an ape, and, when cooped in this fearful prison, was hurled into the sea, or into up 1 Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca historica, i. 77. 8. 2 Diogenes Laërtius, Solon, 10. Cicero, Pro S. Roscio Amerino, 25. Orosius, Historia, v. 16. 3 Exodus, xxi. 15. Cf. Keil, Manual of Biblical Archeology, ii. 376. 4 Herodotus, i. 137. 5 Plato, Leges, ix. 869. Cf. ibid. ix. 873 Müller, Dissertations on the Eumenides of Eschylus, p. 91. Euripides, Orestes, 442 sqq. Cf. 2 some neighbouring river. But by the term parricidium was not understood the murder of a parent only. According to the Lex Pompeia de parricidiis,' it included the murder of any of the following persons: an ascendant or descendant in any degree, a brother or sister, an uncle or aunt, a cousin, a husband or wife, a bridegroom or bride, a father- or mother-in-law, a son or daughterin-law, a step-parent or step-child, a patron; and Mommsen suggests that in earlier times it had a still wider significance, being applied to intentional homicide in general. But whilst the punishment just referred to was in other cases of parricidium replaced by banishment, it was, during the Empire at least, actually inflicted upon him who murdered an ascendant.4 6 Whilst Christianity generally increased the sanctity of human life, it could add nothing to the horror with which parricide was regarded by the ancients. The Church punished it more severely than ordinary murder,5 and so did, at least in Latin countries, the secular authorities. In France, even to this day, a person convicted of parricide is "conduit sur le lieu de l'exécution en chemise, nu-pieds, et la tête couverte d'un voile noir"; and whilst meurtre is excusable if provoked by grave personal violence or by an attempt to break into a dwelling-house by day, parricide is never excusable under any circumstances. 8 p. 570. In Scotland, also, parricide 7 Code Pénal, art. 13. C C |