English

December 6th,2016

Why Some Societies Practiced Ritual Human Sacrifice

In the article “Why Some Societies Practiced Ritual Human Sacrifice” the author analyzes the recent trends in historical interpretation of sacrificing humans. The emergence of the practice of human sacrifice is associated with the sanctity of blood as the embodiment of vital force of the person. As a result, bloodless forms of causing death (drowning, suffocation) have rarely been used in religious context. Human sacrifice was associated with the cult of fertility of the soil, being common among farmers more than hunters and nomads. In primitive agricultural societies a king-priest becomes the victim, embodying the vegetative power of the earth and being equated to the god of fertility. Sometimes a commoner was set there instead of him and sacrificed after a certain period of time as if he was the true king. In modern legal systems human sacrifice is criminalized and viewed as a particular kind of killing – a ritual murder.

The author draws the new insights that sacrifice of humans made the progressive systems present in numerous advanced social orders (Schlossberg). The researchers from New Zealand revealed that the custom may have impelled the move of little social orders to substantial and stratified. As the proves of the data, the article's author notes that the study inspected 93 customary Austronesian societies (speakers of a group of dialects in parts of Asia, Africa and Oceania). It focused on how these societies utilized custom sacrifice and how it influenced social association. The societies were then separated into gatherings: libertarian, tolerably stratified and profoundly stratified. They were characterized by the vicinity or nonattendance of social chain of importance, and the rate of social versatility. The researchers found, maybe as anyone might expect, that sacrifice of humans added to making and protecting social chains of command, and that it expanded the odds that social orders would have more settled strata, which were the positions to be inherit, and less portability. It was likewise helpful for the most to avoid the loss of social differences once they were current.

After claiming the new visions on the human sacrifice, the author turns back to the already existed views on the issue and gives them in the light of the newly given interpretation. This works to create a full picture of a science problem discussed. In spite of its uncouth nature, custom sacrifice of human was a valuable device for elites to keep up or to concrete their potential, or even to transfer their own particular holiness. In these societies sacrifice of humans was usually called for because of a few occasions like breaking of traditions, the funerals of imperative individuals, or the sanctification of a house or vessel (Schlossberg).

To conclude, the authors makes a statement which stress the relevance of the material. The modern world kept the echoes of the human ritual murders, however, at the present it is prohibited by religion all around the world. Nevertheless, some rumors still remained. As one of the promoters of humans sacrifice appears to be the “Game of Thrones” episodes. Thus, the article is rhetorically coherent, as each of it parts provides the points which makes the overall material discussion logical and finished.

References

Schlossberg, Tatiana. “Why Some Societies Practiced Ritual Human Sacrifice”. April 4, 2016. Web.<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/05/science/ritual-human-sacrifice.html? rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience>

Wilkinson, Will. A Guide to Rhetorical Analysis and Critique. Web. <http://uncw.edu/ulc/documents/RhetoricalAnalysisandCritique.pdf>