Ancient African societies were made up of the living, the
ancestors or gods, and the generation unborn. Th e living dei-
fi ed and worshipped the ancestors as god and goddesses be-
cause of their roles in protecting and enhancing the welfare
of the community. Criminal off enses were not only against
the living but also against the ancestors. Th e place of the an-
cestors in the day-to-day activities of the living is evident in
light of the fact that the ancestors were responsible for lay-
ing the foundation of the community, its values, culture, and
sanctions. Th eir demise did not represent their detachment
from the society, and because they were chiefl y responsible
for having made the laws, antisocial behavior was an off ense
against them as well as against the living. Among the Asante
of present-day Ghana “private off enses” (efi sem) are those that
emerge as a result of social, political, and economic relations
solely among the living, while “public off enses” (oman aky-
iwade) are those that involve the entire community, including
the ancestors. Regarding this second category, the living must
make sure that laws are enforced and criminals are punished,
to avoid incurring the wrath of the ancestors.
Criminal codes as we have them today did not exist in
ancient Africa. African criminal laws were based on funda-
mental teachings that were deeply interwoven with several
aspects of culture and custom. A criminal off ense was an act
that breached basic moral teachings or fl outed customs. For
example, the unwritten moral codes of most societies frowned
upon stealing and adultery. For stealing, however, the actual
loss of someone’s property to theft carried less weight than
the eff ects of the criminal’s disobedience on the society’s
morals. Adultery was a criminal off ense because it involved
breach of the trust between husbands and wives. Th e spiritual
vows men and women exchanged during marriage rites made
adultery a serious form of antisocial behavior.
African criminal or legal systems also included taboos.
Indeed, it is diffi cult to diff erentiate between taboos and
laws, because both are integral parts of Africa culture. Th e
list of taboos is endless. Th ere were taboos that governed
when crops should be planted and harvested, when fi shing
should be done, what parts of the community people ought
not venture into, which animals must not be killed, and so on.
Among the Yoruba of present southwestern Nigeria it is sac-
rilegious to hunt game in ancestral forests. Th is type of forest
is preserved for religious and cultural purposes. Forests, riv-
ers, and mountains are the abodes of the gods. In such places
activities that were not spiritual or religious in nature were
thought to be a breach of cultural beliefs and sanctions.
How was crime detected in ancient Africa? In most Afri-
can societies there were gods or cults associated with crime,
and when a criminal act was committed without apprehen-
sion of the perpetrator, the entire community assembled at
the village shrine, where oaths were taken to reveal the of-
fender. It was believed that the gods were capable of striking
and killing off enders immediately aft er such oath takings.
Sometimes the off ender died aft er several weeks of sickness.
In cases where the criminal was apprehended without the
help of deities, the chief or ruler of a community determined
the off ender’s punishment.
Th e gravity of the off ense played a signifi cant role in
determining the type of punishment meted out. Among the
Akan-speaking people (Ghana) off enses such as stealing were
punishable by banishment from the community. In virtually
all African societies crimes like murder were punishable by
death. If an off ense was closely connected to disobedience of
a deity, the off ender might be sacrifi ced to appease the god.
Antisocial elements could be sold into slavery. Not all off end-
ers were killed or banished. In some communities, such as
among the Masai of East Africa, adulterers were made to pay
fi nes in the form of cattle.
Private prosecution of off enders also took place in some
parts of Africa. Magico-religious methods of punishing of-
fenders included placing charms on property that caused
thieves to be paralyzed or die aft er stealing it. Charms (juju)
of this nature can also prevent people from committing
crimes, for instance, by making a stealable commodity less
attractive to the potential thief. Husbands also placed charms
on their wives to punish other men who had sex with them.EGYPT
BY DAVID PETECHUK
Most of what is known about ancient Egyptian law, crime,
and punishment comes from funerary documents and court
manuscripts, as well as some other ancient writings. Drawing
on these sources, historians believe that the earliest Egyp-
tians probably had developed a sophisticated view of right
and wrong within the context of crime and punishment. Th ey
had a comprehensive system of law that addressed crimes
ranging from murder and theft to grave robbing and even
necrophilia, erotic interest in the dead. According to most ac-
counts, Egyptian law was fi rst unifi ed under King Menes (ca.
2925 b.c.e.), who united Upper and Lower Egypt.
As in most ancient cultures, the fi nal authority on all
disputes was the king—in Egypt, the pharaoh—who was con-
sidered a living god and as such was the ultimate judge and
lawmaker. Intertwined with the Egyptian judicial philosophy
was Maat, the goddess who represented the ideals of law, or-
der, and truth. In an attempt to live up to the ideals embodied
by Maat, the pharaohs and those to whom they delegated au-
thority in matters of crime and punishment were expected to
view everyone, except for slaves, as equal under the law. Nev-
ertheless, as in most societies, there were diff erences, both
subtle and overt, in how the judicial system treated people
from diff erent social classes. For example, a noble convicted
of a crime requiring the death sentence might be allowed to
commit suicide, whereas others were executed.
Th e most serious cases of crime in Egypt were decided
by the pharaoh or a special delegation that he appointed. In
rare cases, divine oracles made decisions, oft en for crimes or
transgressions involving the temples and the gods. Because
Egyptians viewed the objects in Egyptian tombs as sacred,crime and punishment: Egypt 297