Homicide of any kind condemned by the early Christians, p.345.—Their total condemnation of warfare, p.345sq.—This attitude towards war was soon given up, pp.346–348.—The feeling that a soldier scarcely could make a good Christian, p.348.—Penance prescribed for those who had shed blood in war, p.348sq.—Wars forbidden by popes, p.349.—The military Christianity of the Crusades, pp.348–352.—Chivalry, pp.352–354.—The intimate connection between chivalry and religion displayed in tournaments, p.354sq.—The practice of private war, p.355sq.—The attitude of the Church towards private war, p.356.—The Truce of God, p.357.—The main cause of the abolition of private war was the increase of the authority of emperors or kings, p.357sq.—War looked upon as a judgment of God, p.358.—The attitude adopted by the great Christian congregations towards war one of sympathetic approval, pp.359–362.—Religious protests against war, pp.362–365.—Freethinkers’ opposition to war, pp.365–367.—The idea of a perpetual peace, p.367.—The awakening spirit of nationalism, and the glorification of war, p.367sq.—Arguments against arbitration, p.368.—The opposition against war rapidly increasing, p.368sq.—The prohibition of needless destruction in war, p.369sq.—The survival, in modern civilisation, of the old feeling that the life of a foreigner is not equally sacred with that of a countryman, p.370.—The behaviour of European colonists towards coloured races, p.370sq.
Sympathetic resentment felt on account of the injury suffered by the victim a potent cause of the condemnation of homicide, p.372sq.—No such resentment felt if the victim is a member of another group, p.373.—Why extra-tribal homicide is approved of,ibid.—Superstition an encouragement to extra-tribal homicide,ibid.—The expansion of the altruistic sentiment largely explains why the prohibition of homicide has come to embrace more and more comprehensive circles of men,ibid.—Homicide viewed as an injury inflicted upon the survivors, p.373sq.—Conceived as a breach of the “King’s peace,” p.374.—Stigmatised as a disturbance of public tranquillity and an outrage on public safety,ibid.—Homicide disapproved of because the manslayer gives trouble to his own people, p.374sq.—The idea that a manslayer is unclean, pp.375–377.—The influence which this idea has exercised on the moral judgment of homicide, p.377.—The disapproval of the deed easily enhanced by the spiritual danger attending on it, as also by the inconvenient restrictions laid on the tabooed manslayer and the ceremonies of purification to which he is subject, p.377sq.—The notion of a persecuting ghost may be replaced by the notion of an avenging god, pp.378–380.—The defilement resulting from homicide particularly shunned by gods, p.380sq.—Priests forbidden to shed human blood, p.381sq.—Reasons for Christianity’s high regard for human life, p.382.
Parricide the most aggravated form of murder, pp.383–386.—The custom of abandoning or killing parents who are worn out with age or disease, p.386sq.—Its causes, pp.387–390.—The custom of abandoning or killing persons suffering from some illness, p.391sq.—Its causes, p.392sq.—The father’s power of life and death over his children, p.393sq.—Infanticide among many savage races permitted or even enjoined by custom, pp.394–398.—The causes of infanticide, and how it has grown into a regular custom, pp.398–402.—Among many savages infanticide said to be unheard of or almost so, p.402sq.—The custom of infanticide not a survival of earliest savagery, but seems to have grown up under specific conditions in later stages of development, p.403.—Savages who disapprove of infanticide, p.403sq.—The custom of infanticide in most cases requires that the child should be killed immediately or soon after its birth, p.404sq.—Infanticide among semi-civilised or civilised races, pp.405–411.—The practice of exposing new-born infants vehemently denounced by the early Fathers of the Church, p.411.—Christian horror of infanticide, p.411sq.—The punishment of infanticide in Christian countries, p.412sq.—Feticide among savages, p.413sq.—Among more civilised nations, p.414sq.—According to Christian views, a form of murder, p.415sq.—Distinctions between anembryo informatusand anembryo formatus, p.416sq.—Modern legislation and opinion concerning feticide, p.417.
The husband’s power of life and death over his wife among many of the lower races, p.418sq.—The right of punishing his wife capitally not universallygranted to the husband in uncivilised communities, p.419.—The husband’s power of life and death among peoples of a higher type,ibid.—Uxoricide punished less severely than matricide, p.419sq.—The estimate of a woman’s life sometimes lower than that of a man’s, sometimes equal to it, sometimes higher, p.420sq.—The master’s power of life and death over his slave, p.421sq.—The right, among many savages, of killing his slave at his own discretion expressly denied to the master, p.422sq.—The murder of another person’s slave largely regarded as an offence against the property of the owner, but not exclusively looked upon in this light, p.423.—When the system of blood-money prevails, the price paid for the life of a slave less than that paid for the life of a freeman,ibid.—Among the nations of archaic culture, also, the life of a slave held in less estimation than that of a freeman, but not even the master in all circumstances allowed to put his slave to death, pp.423–426.—Efforts of the Christian Church to secure the life of the slave against the violence of the master, p.426.—But neither the ecclesiastical nor the secular legislation gave him the same protection as was bestowed upon the free member of the Church and State, pp.426–428.—In modern times, in Christian countries, the life of the negro slave was only inadequately protected by law, p.428sq.—Why the life of a slave is held in so little regard, p.429.—The killing of a freeman by a slave, especially if the victim be his owner, commonly punished more severely than if the same act were done by a free person, p.429sq.—In the estimate of life a distinction also made between different classes of freemen, p.430sq.—The magnitude of the crime may depend not only on the rank of the victim, but on the rank of the manslayer as well, pp.431–433.—Explanation of this influence of class, p.433.—In progressive societies each member of the society at last admitted to be born with an equal claim to the right to live,ibid.
The prevalence of human sacrifice, pp.434–436.—This practice much more frequently found among barbarians and semi-civilised peoples than among genuine savages, p.436sq.—Among some peoples it has been noticed to become increasingly prevalent in the course of time, p.437.—Human sacrifice partly due to the idea that gods have an appetite for human flesh or blood, p.437sq.—Sometimes connected with the idea that gods require attendants, p.438.—Moreover, an angry god may be appeased simply by the death of him or those who aroused his anger, or of some representative of the offending community, or of somebody belonging to the kin of the offender, pp.438–440.—Human sacrifice chiefly a method of life-insurance, based on the idea of substitution, p.440.—Human victims offered in war, before a battle, or during a siege, p.440sq.—For the purpose of stopping or preventing epidemics, p.441sq.—For the purpose of putting an end to a devastating famine, p.442sq.—For the purpose of preventing famine, p.443sq.—Criticism of Dr. Frazer’s hypothesis that the human victim who is killed for the purpose of ensuring good crops is regarded as a representative of the corn-spirit and is slain as such, pp.444–451.—Human victims offered with a view to getting water, p.451sq.—With a view to averting perils arising from the sea or from rivers, pp.452–454.—For the purpose of preventing the death of some particular individual, especially a chief or a king, from sickness, old age, or other circumstances, pp.454–457.—For the purpose of helping other men into existence, p.457sq.—The killing of the first-born child, or the first-born son, p.458sq.—Explanation of this practice, pp.459–461.—Human sacrifices offered in connection with the foundation of buildings, p.461sq.—The building-sacrifice, like other kinds of human sacrifice, probably based on the idea of substitution, pp.462–464.—The belief thatthe soul of the victim is converted into a protecting demon, p.464sq.—The human victim regarded as a messenger, p.465sq.—Human sacrifice not an act of wanton cruelty, p.466.—The king or chief sometimes sacrificed,ibid.—The victims frequently prisoners of war or other aliens, or slaves, or criminals, pp.466–468.—The disappearance of human sacrifice, p.468.—Human sacrifice condemned, p.465sq.—Practices intended to replace it, p.469.—Human effigies or animals offered instead of men, p.469sq.—Human sacrifices succeeded by practices involving the effusion of human blood without loss of life, p.470.—Bleeding or mutilation practised for the same purpose as human sacrifice, p.470sq.—Why the penal sacrifice of offenders has outlived all other forms of human sacrifice, p.471.—Human beings sacrificed to the dead in order to serve them as slaves, wives, or companions, pp.472–474.—This custom dwindling into a survival, p.475.—The funeral sacrifice of men and animals also seems to involve an intention to vivify the spirits of the deceased with blood, p.475sq.—Manslayers killed in order to satisfy their victims’ craving for revenge, p.476.
The prevalence of the custom of blood-revenge, pp.477–479.—Blood-revenge regarded not only as a right, but as a duty, p.479sq.—This duty in the first place regarded as a duty to the dead, whose spirit is believed to find no rest after death until the injury has been avenged, p.481sq.—Blood-revenge a form of human sacrifice, p.482.—Blood-revenge also practised on account of the injury inflicted on the survivors, p.482sq.—Murder committed within the family or kin left unavenged, p.483.—The injury inflicted on the relatives of the murdered man suggests not only revenge, but reparation,ibid.—The taking of life for life may itself, in a way, serve as compensation, p.483sq.—Various methods of compensation, p.484.—The advantages of the practice of composition, p.484sq.—Its disadvantages, p.485.—The importance of these disadvantages depends on the circumstances in each special case, p.486sq.—Among many peoples the rule of revenge strictly followed, and to accept compensation considered disgraceful, p.487.—The acceptance of compensation does not always mean that the family of the slain altogether renounce their right of revenge, p.487sq.—The acceptance of compensation allowed as a justifiable alternative for blood-revenge, or even regarded as the proper method of settling the case, p.488sq.—The system of compensation partly due to the pressure of some intervening authority, p.489sq.—The adoption of this method for the settling of disputes a sign of weakness, p.491.—When the central power of jurisdiction is firmly established, the rule of life for life regains its sway,ibid.—A person may forfeit his right to live by other crimes besides homicide, p.491sq.—Opposition to and arguments against capital punishment, pp.492–495.—Modern legislation has undergone a radical change with reference to capital punishment, p.495.—Arguments against its abolition, p.495sq.—The chief motive for retaining it in modern legislation, p.496.
Duelling resorted to as a means of bringing to an end hostilities between different groups of people, p.497sq.—Duels fought for the purpose of settling disputes between individuals, either by conferring on the victor the right of possessingthe object of the strife, or by gratifying a craving for revenge and wiping off the affront, pp.498–502.—The circumstances to which these customs are due, p.503sq.—The duel as an ordeal or “judgment of God,” p.504sq.—The judicial duel fundamentally derived its efficacy as a means of ascertaining the truth from its connection with an oath, p.505sq.How it came to be regarded as an appeal to the justice of God, p.506sq.—The decline and disappearance of the judicial duel, p.507.—The modern duel of honour, pp.507–509.—Its causes, p.509.—Arguments adduced in support of it, p.509sq.
In the case of bodily injuries the magnitude of the offence, other things being equal, proportionate to the harm inflicted, pp.511–513.—The degree of the offence also depends on the station of the parties concerned, and in some cases the infliction of pain held allowable or even a duty, p.513.—Children using violence against their parents,ibid.—Parents’ right to inflict corporal punishment on their children, p.513sq.—The husband’s right to chastise his wife, pp.514–516.—The master’s right to inflict corporal punishment on his slave, p.516sq.—The maltreatment of another person’s slave regarded as an injury done to the master, rather than to the slave, p.517.—Slaves severely punished for inflicting bodily injuries on freemen, p.510.—The penalties or fines for bodily injuries influenced by the class or rank of the parties when both of them are freemen, p.518sq.—Distinction between compatriots and aliens with reference to bodily injuries, p.519.—The infliction of sufferings on vanquished enemies, p.519sq.—The right to bodily integrity influenced by religious differences, p.520—Forfeited by the commission of a crime, p.520sq.—Amputation or mutilation of the offending member has particularly been in vogue among peoples of culture, p.521sq.—The disappearance of corporal punishment in Europe, p.522.—Corporal punishment has been by preference a punishment for poor and common people or slaves, p.522sq.—The status of a person influencing his right to bodily integrity with reference to judicial torture, p.523sq.—Explanation of the moral notions regarding the infliction of bodily injuries, p.524.—The notions that an act of bodily violence involves a gross insult, and that corporal punishment disgraces the criminal more than any other form of penalty, p.524sq.
The mother’s duty to rear her children, p.526.—The husband’s and father’s duty to protect and support his family, pp.526–529.—The parents’ duty of taking care of their offspring in the first place based on the sentiment of parental affection, p.529.—The universality not only of the maternal, but of the paternal, sentiment in mankind, pp.529–532.—Marital affection among savages, p.532.—Explanation of the simplest paternal and marital duties, p.533—Children’s duty of supporting their aged parents, pp.533–538. The duty of assisting brothers and sisters, p.538.—Of assisting more distant relatives, pp.538–540.—Uncivilised peoples as a rule described as kind towards members of their own community or tribe, enjoin charity between themselves as a duty, and praise generosity as a virtue, pp.540–546.—Among many savages the old people, in particular, have a claim to support and assistance, p.546.—The sick often carefully attended to, pp.546–548.—Accounts of uncharitable savages, p.548sq.—Among semi-civilised and civilised nations charity universally regarded as a duty, and often strenuously enjoined by their religions, pp.549–556.—In the course of progressing civilisation the obligation of assisting the needy has been extended to wider and wider circles of men, pp.556–558.—The duty of tending wounded enemies in war, p.558.—Explanation of the gradual expansion of the duty of charity, p.559.—This duty in the first place based on the altruistic sentiment, p.559sq.—Egoistic motives for the doing of good to fellow-creatures, p.560.—By niggardliness a person may expose himself to supernatural dangers, pp.560–562.—Liberality may entail supernatural reward, p.562sq.—The curses and blessings of the poor partly account for the fact that charity has come to be regarded as a religious duty, pp.563–565.—The chief cause of the extraordinary stress which the higher religions put on the duty of charity seems to lie in the connection between almsgiving and sacrifice, the poor becoming the natural heirs of the god, p.565.—Instances of sacrificial food being left for, or distributed among, the poor, p.565sq.—Almsgiving itself regarded as a form of sacrifice, or taking the place of it, pp.566–569.
Instances of great kindness displayed by savages towards persons of a foreign race, pp.570–572.—Hospitality a universal custom among the lower races and among the peoples of culture at the earlier stages of their civilisation, pp.572–574.—The stranger treated with special marks of honour, and enjoying extraordinary privileges as a guest, pp.574–576.—Custom may require that hospitality should be shown even to an enemy, p.576sq.—To protect a guest looked upon as a most stringent duty, p.577sq.—Hospitality in a remarkable degree associated with religion, pp.578–580.—The rules of hospitality in the main based on egoistic considerations, p.581.—The stranger, supposed to bring with him good luck or blessings, pp.581–583.—The blessings of a stranger considered exceptionally powerful, p.583sq.—The visiting stranger regarded as a potential source of evil, p.584.—His evil wishes and curses greatly feared, owing partly to his quasi-supernatural character, partly to the close contact in which he comes with the host and his belongings, pp.584–590.—Precautions taken against the visiting stranger, pp.590–593.—Why no payment is received from a guest, p.593sq.—The duty of hospitality limited by time, p.594sq.—The cause of this, p.595sq.—The decline of hospitality in progressive communities, p.596.
The right of personal freedom never absolute, p.597.—Among some savages a man’s children are in the power of the head of their mother’s family or of their maternal uncle, p.597sq.—Among the great bulk of existing savages children are in the power of their father, though he may to some extent have to share his authority with the mother, p.598sq.—The extent of the father’s power subject to great variations, p.599.—Among some savages the father’s authority practically very slight, p.599sq.—Other savages by no means deficient in filial piety, p.600sq.—The period during which the paternal authority lasts, p.601sq.—Old age commands respect and gives authority, pp.603–605.—Superiority of age also gives a certain amountof power, p.605sq.—The reverence for old age may cease when the grey-head becomes an incumbrance to those around him, and imbecility may put an end to the father’s authority over his family, p.606sq.—Paternal, or parental, authority and filial reverence at their height among peoples of archaic culture, pp.607–613.—Among these peoples we also meet with reverence for the elder brother, for persons of a superior age generally, and especially for the aged, p.614sq.—Decline of the paternal authority in Europe, p.615sq.—Christianity not unfavourable to the emancipation of children, though obedience to parents was enjoined as a Christian duty, p.616sq.—The Roman notions of paternal rights and filial duties have to some extent survived in Latin countries, p.617sq.—Sources of the parental authority, p.618sq.—Among savages, in particular, filial regard is largely regard for one’s elders or the aged, p.619.—Causes of the regard for old age, pp.619–621.—The chief cause of the connection between filial submissiveness and religious beliefs the extreme importance attached to parental curses and blessings, pp.621–626.—Why the blessings and curses of parents are supposed to possess an unusual power, p.626sq.—Explanation of the extraordinary development of the paternal authority in the archaic State, p.627sq.—Causes of the downfall of the paternal power, p.628.
Among the lower races the wife frequently said to be the property or slave of her husband, p.629sq.—Yet even in such cases custom has not left her entirely destitute of rights, p.630sq.—The so-called absolute authority of husbands over their wives not to be taken too literally, p.631sq.—The bride-price does noteo ipsoconfer on the husband absolute rights over her, p.632sq.—The hardest drudgeries of life often said to be imposed on the women, p.633sq.—In early society each sex has its own pursuits, p.634.—The rules according to which the various occupations of life are divided between the sexes are on the whole in conformity with the indications given by nature, p.635sq.—This division of labour emphasised by custom and superstition, p.636sq.—It is apt to mislead the travelling stranger, p.637.—It gives the wife authority within the circle which is exclusively her own,ibid.—Rejection of the broad statement that the lower races in general hold their women in a state of almost complete subjection, pp.638–646.—The opinion that a people’s civilisation may be measured by the position held by the women not correct, at least so far as the earlier stages of culture are concerned, p.646sq.—The position of woman among the peoples of archaic civilisation, pp.647–653.—Christianity tended to narrow the remarkable liberty granted to married women under the Roman Empire, p.653sq.—Christian orthodoxy opposed to the doctrine that marriage should be a contract on the footing of perfect equality between husband and wife, p.654sq.—Criticism of the hypothesis that the socialstatusof women is connected with the system of tracing descent, p.655sq.—The authority of a husband who lives with his wife in the house or community of her father, p.656sq.—Wives’ subjection to their husbands in the first place due to the men’s instinctive desire to exert power, and to the natural inferiority of women in such qualities of body and mind as are essential for personal independence, p.657.—Elements in the sexual impulse which lead to domination on the part of the man and to submission on the part of the woman, p.657sq.—But if the man’s domination is carried beyond the limits of female love, the woman feels it as a burden, p.658sq.—In extreme cases of oppression, at any rate, the community at large would sympathise with her, and the public resentment against the oppressor would result in customs or laws limiting thehusband’s rights, p.659.—The offended woman may count upon the support of her fellow-sisters,ibid.—The children’s affection and regard for their mother gives her power,ibid.—The influence which economic conditions exercise on the position of woman, pp.659–661.—The status of wives connected with the ideas held about the female sex in general, p.661.—Woman regarded as intellectually and morally vastly inferior to man, especially among nations more advanced in culture, pp.661–663.—Progress in civilisation has exercised an unfavourable influence on the position of woman by widening the gulf between the sexes, p.663.—Religion has contributed to her degradation by regarding her as unclean, p.663sq.—Women excluded from religious worship and sacred functions, pp.664–666.—The notion that woman is unclean, however, gives her a secret power over her husband, as women are supposed to be better versed in magic than men, pp.666–668.—The curses of women greatly feared, p.668.—Woman as an asylum, p.668sq.—In archaic civilisation thestatusof married women was affected by the fact that the house-father was invested with some part of the power which formerly belonged to the clan, p.669.—Causes of the decrease of the husband’s authority over his wife in modern civilisation,ibid.
Definition of slavery, p.670sq.—The distribution of slavery and its causes among savages, pp.671–674.—The earliest source of slavery was probably war or conquest, p.674sq.—Intra-tribal slavery among savages, p.675sq.—The master’s power over his slave among slave-holding savages, pp.676–678.—Among the lower races slaves are generally treated kindly, pp.678–680.—Intra-tribal slaves, especially such as are born in the house, generally treated better than extra-tribal or purchased slaves, p.680sq.—Slavery among the nations of archaic culture, pp.681–693.—The attitude of Christianity towards slavery, pp.693–700.—The supposed causes of the extinction of slavery in Europe, pp.697–701.—The chief cause the transformation of slavery into serfdom, p.701.—Serfdom only a transitory condition leading up to a state of entire liberty, pp.701–703.—The attitude of the Church towards serfdom, p.703sq.—The negro slavery in the colonies of European countries and the Southern States of America, and the legislation relating to it, pp.704–711.—The support given to it by the clergy, pp.711–713.—The want of sympathy for, or positive antipathy to, the coloured race, p.713sq.—The opinions regarding slavery and the condition of slaves influenced by altruistic considerations, p.714sq.—The condition of slaves influenced by the selfish considerations of their masters, p.715sq.