In very many cases, especially in the rhetorical schools,
“inhospitality,” “hatred of strangers,” was a mere abusive tag,
available without any excessive consideration of the facts. And when
intense enmity was to be exhibited, the extreme form of “inhospitality”
was naturally enough both implicitly and expressly charged against the
objects of the writer’s dislike.
[Illustration: GREEK INSCRIPTION, FOUND ON SITE OF TEMPLE AREA,
FORBIDDING GENTILES TO PASS BEYOND THE INNER TEMPLE WALLS AT JERUSALEM
(Now In the Imperial Ottoman Museum Constantinople)]
There are many instances in which the hereditary enemy was credited with
human sacrifice or cannibalism. Indeed it was currently believed that
cannibalism had universally prevailed at one time, and with advancing
civilization was gradually superseded.[201] As far as human sacrifice
was concerned, many highly civilized states knew of vestiges or actual
recurrences of it in their own practice. Rome is a striking example. But
in Rome such things were rare exceptions, employed in times of unusual
straits to meet a quite unusual emergency.[202] In Greece there were
many traces frankly admitted to be such—if not actual instances of such
sacrifices. But here, as at Rome, the act was admittedly something out
of the ordinary, a survival of primitive savagery.[203]
Accordingly when Greeks and Romans spoke of human sacrifices, it was not
of an inconceivable form of barbarity, which placed those who took part
in it quite out of the human pale, but as a relic of a condition from
which they had themselves happily grown, and to which they reverted only
in extremities. Its presence among other tribes was a demonstration that
they were still in the barbarous stage, and especially was it deemed to
be so when all strangers who chanced to come upon the foreign shore were
the selected victims of the god.
That charge, as we know, was made against many Scythian and Thracian
tribes. The story of Iphigenia in Tauris is an example of it. It was
made against the Carthaginians, at least in the early stages of their
history. The Gauls, according to both Greek and Roman writers, had made
of it a very common institution.[204] We do not know very much of the
evidence in the case of the Thracians, Scythians, and Gauls. It is not
impossible that customs like certain symbolic rites found in many places
were misinterpreted. Or it is highly likely that, if human sacrifices
existed, they were, as among Greeks and Romans, a rare form of
expiation. For the Carthaginians the story is almost certainly a
by-product of national hatred, and rests upon the same foundations as
the “cruelty” and “perfidy” of Hannibal.
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