Cited by 188Violence, Religion, and PhilosophyLanguage and cultural evolutionEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Ritual human sacrifice promoted and sustained the evolution of stratified societies

Watts, Joseph, Sheehan, Oliver, Atkinson, Quentin D., Bulbulia, Joseph, Gray, Russell D.·2016·Nature

Abstract

Evidence for human sacrifice is found throughout the archaeological record of early civilizations, the ethnographic records of indigenous world cultures, and the texts of the most prolific contemporary religions. According to the social control hypothesis, human sacrifice legitimizes political authority and social class systems, functioning to stabilize such social stratification. Support for the social control hypothesis is largely limited to historical anecdotes of human sacrifice, where the causal claims have not been subject to rigorous quantitative cross-cultural tests. Here we test the social control hypothesis by applying Bayesian phylogenetic methods to a geographically and socially diverse sample of 93 traditional Austronesian cultures. We find strong support for models in which human sacrifice stabilizes social stratification once stratification has arisen, and promotes a shift to strictly inherited class systems. Whilst evolutionary theories of religion have focused on the functionality of prosocial and moral beliefs, our results reveal a darker link between religion and the evolution of modern hierarchical societies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature17159

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Watts, J., Sheehan, O., Atkinson, Q. D., Bulbulia, J., & Gray, R. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Victoria University of Wellington (NZ)
  • Australian National University (AU)
Corresponding author
Watts, Joseph
Venue
Nature
Published
2016-04
Volume
532
Issue
7598
Pages
228-231
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2323566052
Cited by
188
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 3
FWCI
124.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Violence, Religion, and Philosophy
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
social stratification, social hierarchy, evolution of religion, political authority, cross-cultural comparison
MeSH terms
Bayes Theorem, Ceremonial Behavior, Cultural Evolution, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Phylogeny, Religion and Psychology, Social Class, Social Control, Formal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review