5 ms·

I think I remember reading (maybe in the book WEIRD) that in Western societies, as the "rule of law" spread and as society became more individualistic overall,

I think I remember reading (maybe in the book WEIRD) that in Western societies, as the "rule of law" spread and as society became more individualistic overall, murders shifted from being between strangers or weak acquaintances (ie a dispute, a robbery, etc) to being intrafamily (ie killing a spouse, parent, etc). Ie 200 years ago, it was unheard of, but now most murders are like that. Abuse might be different, I couldn't find data (and im guessing that data on abuse would be harder to find than on murders).

Chris2048 5y ago
> 200 years ago, it was unheard of That doesn't mean it didn't happen - I assume it happened more in the past and just almost never reported.
- winnit 5y ago
  Why would you assume that one type of killing was reported more than another kind? From the evidence I have gathered from primitive societies existing today without conventional legal apparatuses, they find the concept of murder within the society almost unthinkable and have no memory of such events taking place. On the other hand, it is not typically seen as murder to kill an outsider.
  - folli 5y ago
    I assume there was (and partially still is) a very strict taboo on intrafamilial murder and abuse. It's very hard to hide a murder nowadays, but just looking at abuse, we know there are a lot of unreported cases even in a modern society. It must have been much worse in more 'primitive' societies.
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    Who would report it? If parent kill their child they are unlikely to, if someone else kills their child they are likely to. > From the evidence I have gathered from primitive societies What evidence are you referring to? Also, again "unthinkable" is different from it not happening. In fact, it makes it even more likely to be covered up, if people don't care to investigate, or otherwise want to know.
  - bluGill 5y ago
    I would assume that it happened but was passed off as an accident and not murder. That is a man runs crying to town "my wife is dead!", cries at the funeral, and gets community support as a man grieving his wife - she is dead because he poisoned her, or ensured she would get hit by those falling rocks that look like an accident, but if you don't have modern investigation you have no way of knowing that. (it can go the other way too of course) There are lots of ways to kill. Some will be investigated more than others.
  - ksdale 5y ago
    On the other hand, I think it was common in a lot of places for a long time for families/clans to settle disputes internally - if someone was killed and everyone agreed it was justice, then it wouldn't end up reported/remarkable. This is probably the category that most intrafamily disputes would fall into.
  - willyt 5y ago
    A lot of old fashioned nursery rhymes and children's stories are about evil step-parents?
- heresie-dabord 5y ago
  Also, during this period, the population moved from rural dwellings to cities, where there are (usually) more jobs and more written rules and policing. But note that in the period in question, the human population has increased by a factor of 7.[0] The population of the planet has more than doubled since 1970.[0] More people in cities. And more voices, more disagreements, and more misfortunes to report. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Past_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Past_populati...
cafard 5y ago
Isn't intrafamily killing more or less a staple of ancient literature? Cain/Abel, Romulus/Remus, Clytemnestra/Agamemnon, etc. There is quite a high local murder rate at the moment, but most of that seems to result from drug-business disputes, or simply the availability of firearms to settle neighborhood disputes.
- Turing_Machine 5y ago
  Under Roman law, the paterfamilias (i.e., the eldest adult male of the extended family) had the right to kill any other family member, at his pleasure. He could also control who (or even if) they married, sell them into slavery, etc.
  - morsch 5y ago
    "Over time, the absolute authority of the pater familias weakened, and rights that theoretically existed were no longer enforced or insisted upon. The power over life and death was abolished, the right of punishment was moderated and the sale of children was restricted to cases of extreme necessity. Under Emperor Hadrian, a father who killed his son was stripped of both his citizenship and all its attendant rights, had his property confiscated and was permanently exiled." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias
    - Turing_Machine 5y ago
      Yeah, it obviously changed over time, and is no longer in effect today. Hadrian was quite late in Roman history, far closer to its collapse than its founding.
      - morsch 5y ago
        German Wikipedia refers to this authority as "closely watched" for abuse by public officials; there being reports of such abuse, but only a few of them; and it being a "mostly symbolic" right. There are fifteen cases of killings known to us, and in almost all of them, the punishment would also have been due to other legal constructs. None of this contradicts anything you said, I'm just adding some context. Roman heads of family obviously weren't habitually killing relatives all the time. https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_Potestas https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_Potestas
lr4444lr 5y ago
Murders we tracked, or murders committed? Without the rule of law, perhaps scores were settled in ad hoc village or clan courts without reporting to the outside world.

Chris2048 5y ago

> 200 years ago, it was unheard of That doesn't mean it didn't happen - I assume it happened more in the past and just almost never reported.

winnit 5y ago
Why would you assume that one type of killing was reported more than another kind? From the evidence I have gathered from primitive societies existing today without conventional legal apparatuses, they find the concept of murder within the society almost unthinkable and have no memory of such events taking place. On the other hand, it is not typically seen as murder to kill an outsider.
- folli 5y ago
  I assume there was (and partially still is) a very strict taboo on intrafamilial murder and abuse. It's very hard to hide a murder nowadays, but just looking at abuse, we know there are a lot of unreported cases even in a modern society. It must have been much worse in more 'primitive' societies.
- Chris2048 5y ago
  Who would report it? If parent kill their child they are unlikely to, if someone else kills their child they are likely to. > From the evidence I have gathered from primitive societies What evidence are you referring to? Also, again "unthinkable" is different from it not happening. In fact, it makes it even more likely to be covered up, if people don't care to investigate, or otherwise want to know.
- bluGill 5y ago
  I would assume that it happened but was passed off as an accident and not murder. That is a man runs crying to town "my wife is dead!", cries at the funeral, and gets community support as a man grieving his wife - she is dead because he poisoned her, or ensured she would get hit by those falling rocks that look like an accident, but if you don't have modern investigation you have no way of knowing that. (it can go the other way too of course) There are lots of ways to kill. Some will be investigated more than others.
- ksdale 5y ago
  On the other hand, I think it was common in a lot of places for a long time for families/clans to settle disputes internally - if someone was killed and everyone agreed it was justice, then it wouldn't end up reported/remarkable. This is probably the category that most intrafamily disputes would fall into.
- willyt 5y ago
  A lot of old fashioned nursery rhymes and children's stories are about evil step-parents?
heresie-dabord 5y ago
Also, during this period, the population moved from rural dwellings to cities, where there are (usually) more jobs and more written rules and policing. But note that in the period in question, the human population has increased by a factor of 7.[0] The population of the planet has more than doubled since 1970.[0] More people in cities. And more voices, more disagreements, and more misfortunes to report. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Past_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Past_populati...

cafard 5y ago

Isn't intrafamily killing more or less a staple of ancient literature? Cain/Abel, Romulus/Remus, Clytemnestra/Agamemnon, etc. There is quite a high local murder rate at the moment, but most of that seems to result from drug-business disputes, or simply the availability of firearms to settle neighborhood disputes.

Turing_Machine 5y ago
Under Roman law, the paterfamilias (i.e., the eldest adult male of the extended family) had the right to kill any other family member, at his pleasure. He could also control who (or even if) they married, sell them into slavery, etc.
- morsch 5y ago
  "Over time, the absolute authority of the pater familias weakened, and rights that theoretically existed were no longer enforced or insisted upon. The power over life and death was abolished, the right of punishment was moderated and the sale of children was restricted to cases of extreme necessity. Under Emperor Hadrian, a father who killed his son was stripped of both his citizenship and all its attendant rights, had his property confiscated and was permanently exiled." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias
  - Turing_Machine 5y ago
    Yeah, it obviously changed over time, and is no longer in effect today. Hadrian was quite late in Roman history, far closer to its collapse than its founding.
    - morsch 5y ago
      German Wikipedia refers to this authority as "closely watched" for abuse by public officials; there being reports of such abuse, but only a few of them; and it being a "mostly symbolic" right. There are fifteen cases of killings known to us, and in almost all of them, the punishment would also have been due to other legal constructs. None of this contradicts anything you said, I'm just adding some context. Roman heads of family obviously weren't habitually killing relatives all the time. https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_Potestas https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_Potestas

lr4444lr 5y ago

Murders we tracked, or murders committed? Without the rule of law, perhaps scores were settled in ad hoc village or clan courts without reporting to the outside world.