Human sacrifice was a rare practice among the cultures of ancient Mesopotamia. Our best-sourced occurrences are the archaeological remains from the royal death pits at Early Dynastic Ur (c. 2600–2450 BCE) and textual records of the substitute king ritual that was practised at least from the early second millennium BCE down to the time of Alexander the Great. Such sporadic occurrences of ritual human sacrifice require an investigation as to why it happened at all. This chapter examines the practice of human sacrifice in the light of its respective historical and cultural contexts to better understand this extreme form of ritual violence. It finds that while there are rather different contexts, in both instances it is clear that the office of kingship held absolute power over the subjects who were disposed of for the sake of the ruler.

Military violence or warfare played a significant role in shaping the culture and society of ancient China. Nonetheless the subject has generated far less discussion than it deserves. This chapter studies the relationship between violence and warfare and their impact on the political, social and cultural trajectory of China in the period between the late third century BCE and the sixth century CE – a period during which the course of Chinese history went through the establishment of the early empires, their collapse, and the ensuing political division that lasted for nearly three centuries. It covers the topics of various notions of ‘just war’, the conduct of warfare, institutions of military mobilisation, military rites and their practices, and the mutual influence of religious beliefs and massive violence. Through an examination of multiple sources of evidence the chapter arrives at a broad understanding of how people in early imperial China conceptualised and justified violence in warfare, as well as the circumstances and purposes to which they resorted to war.

Scholars up until the middle of the twentieth century saw Roman warfare as restrained and disciplined. At that point the consensus changed to one that viewed it as fierce and bellicose. This view, in turn, has been challenged in the early twenty-first century, with the argument that Roman conflict was typical for ancient states. Rome’s rise from city-state to empire certainly involved considerable violence, but the available evidence cannot conclusive demonstrate either that it was particularly brutal and aggressive or that its military actions were ordinary for the period. Sources report that Roman battle was especially bloody, but this can be interpreted as a result of culture or of weaponry. We read of large numbers of civilians killed and enslaved, but such accounts need to be viewed critically and compared to the ancient norm. Additionally, the reality and nature of the imperial Pax Romana continues to be debated. The apparent decline in uprisings against Roman rule is worthy of note, but there may have been revolts and wars we do not know about. At this point in time historians are not in a position to definitively state what the nature of Roman military violence was.

The ascendancy of the Mazdayasnian priesthood at the court of the Persian king of kings led ultimately to Mani’s trial, imprisonment and death at Gondeshapur under King Bahram I. This was commemorated by the community as his crucifixion and compared to the sufferings of all previous righteous messengers of God. The inter-religious conflict and the dramatic events of Mani’s last days and martyrdom were uniquely significant for the development of religion in Sasanian Iran. This chapter examines the various available sources, and questions the factual and counter-factual memory of the Apostle preserved into the medieval and modern world.