3 ms·
Earlier societies found it more cost effective to exile or kill people. But the least socially damaging option was to fine people, thereby lowering their social
by whiddershins 6y ago
Earlier societies found it more cost effective to exile or kill people. But the least socially damaging option was to fine people, thereby lowering their social status.
Because lives were so important to the survival of the group, you couldn’t casually discard one.
So someone who murdered someone might pay a severe fine which would lower their social status to the point where they couldn’t have a family etc.
But yes, buying your way out of punishment was normal.
Should we go back to that, you think?
- analog31 6y agoWhile on a family trip to Iceland, I read a translation of Njal's Saga. Granted, you have to read it in light of the fact that it wasn't written down until a long time after the events happened. But it describes Iceland's ancient legal system in some detail. If you killed someone, you could be sued, tried, and fined. The fine went to the victim's family. What it looks like happened in practice was that the victim's family wasn't really satisfied that justice was done, and would conduct a revenge killing. Then the money would pass back to the other family again. The practical effect was that the entire saga is like a decades long blood feud, mediated by the court system. Of course it was fascinating to read, especially since we were visiting places described in the saga, such as Thingvellier, where they met to conduct government and trials. They had another system, where if you were utterly uncontrollable, they could vote you off the island by making you an outlaw, meaning that anybody could kill you without repercussion.
- sillysaurusx 6y agoThis was an amazing comment. Thanks for writing it. We recently visited Iceland but didn't hear anything like this. Lovely place.
- troupe 6y agoI'm not sure how well this would work unless you also remove social programs designed to raise the standard of living.