History of European Morals From Augustus to Charlemagne (Vol. 2 of 2)Lecky, William Edward Hartpole
Philosophy
History of European Morals From Augustus to Charlemagne (Vol. 2 of 2)
Lecky, William Edward Hartpole
Ethics; Europe -- Moral conditions
But although theological influences cannot reasonably be said to have
diminished the number of wars, they have had a very real and beneficial
effect in diminishing their atrocity. On few subjects have the moral
opinions of different ages exhibited so marked a variation as in their
judgments of what punishment may justly be imposed on a conquered enemy,
and these variations have often been cited as an argument against those
who believe in the existence of natural moral perceptions. To those,
however, who accept that doctrine, with the limitations that have been
stated in the first chapter, they can cause no perplexity. In the first
dawning of the human intelligence (as I have said) the notion of duty, as
distinguished from that of interest, appears, and the mind, in reviewing
the various emotions by which it is influenced, recognises the unselfish
and benevolent motives as essentially and generically superior to the
selfish and the cruel. But it is the general condition of society alone
that determines the standard of benevolence—the classes towards which
every good man will exercise it. At first, the range of duty is the
family, the tribe, the state, the confederation. Within these limits every
man feels himself under moral obligations to those about him; but he
regards the outer world as we regard wild animals, as beings upon whom he
may justifiably prey. Hence, we may explain the curious fact that the
terms brigand or corsair conveyed in the early stages of society no notion
of moral guilt.(528) Such men were looked upon simply as we look upon
huntsmen, and if they displayed courage and skill in their pursuit, they
were deemed fit subjects for admiration. Even in the writings of the most
enlightened philosophers of Greece, war with barbarians is represented as
a form of chase, and the simple desire of obtaining the barbarians as
slaves was considered a sufficient reason for invading them. The right of
the conqueror to kill his captives was generally recognised, nor was it at
first restricted by any considerations of age or sex. Several instances
are recorded of Greek and other cities being deliberately destroyed by
Greeks or by Romans, and the entire populations ruthlessly massacred.(529)
The whole career of the early republic of Rome, though much idealised and
transfigured by later historians, was probably governed by these
principles.(530) The normal fate of the captive, which, among barbarians,
had been death, was, in civilised antiquity, slavery; but many thousands
were condemned to the gladiatorial shows, and the vanquished general was
commonly slain in the Mamertine prison, while his conqueror ascended in
triumph to the Capitol.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account