Biblical Servant Leadership 1st ed.

Edition Steven Crowther

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/biblical-servant-leadership-1st-ed-edition-steven-crow
ther/
C H R I S T I A N FA I T H P E R S P E C T I V E S I N L E A D E R S H I P A N D BU S I N E S S

Biblical Servant
Leadership

An Exploration of Leadership
for the Contemporary Context

S T E V E N C ROW T H E R
 Christian Faith Perspectives in
Leadership and Business

Series Editors
Kathleen Patterson
School of Global Leadership and Entrepreneurship
Regent University
Virginia Beach, VA, USA

Doris Gomez
Regent University
Virginia Beach, VA, USA

Bruce E. Winston
Regent University
Virginia Beach, VA, USA

Gary Oster
Regent University
Virginia Beach, VA, USA
This book series is designed to integrate Christian faith-based perspectives
into the field of leadership and business, widening its influence by taking
a deeper look at its foundational roots. It is led by a team of experts from
Regent University, recognized by the Coalition of Christian Colleges and
Universities as the leader in servant leadership research and the first
Christian University to integrate innovation, design thinking, and
entrepreneurship courses in its Masters and Doctoral programs. Stemming
from Regent’s hallmark values of innovation and Christian faith-based
perspectives, the series aims to put forth top-notch scholarship from
current faculty, students, and alumni of Regent’s School of Business &
Leadership, allowing for both scholarly and practical aspects to be
addressed while providing robust content and relevant material to readers.
Each volume in the series will contribute to filling the void of a scholarly
Christian-faith perspective on key aspects of organizational leadership
and business such as Business and Innovation, Biblical Perspectives in
Business and Leadership, and Servant Leadership. The series takes a
unique approach to such broad-based and well-trodden disciplines as
leadership, business, innovation, and entrepreneurship, positioning itself
as a much-needed resource for students, academics, and leaders rooted in
Christian-faith traditions.

More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/15425
 Steven Crowther

Biblical Servant
Leadership
An Exploration of Leadership for the
Contemporary Context
Steven Crowther
Grace College of Divinity
Fayetteville, NC, USA

Christian Faith Perspectives in Leadership and Business

ISBN 978-3-319-89568-0    ISBN 978-3-319-89569-7 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89569-7

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018944428

All scripture quotations are taken from the New American Standard Version unless otherwise noted:
Scriptures are taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD (NAS): Scripture taken from the NEW
AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE®, copyright© 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975,
1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.

Scriptures marked NIV are taken from the NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (NIV): Scripture
taken from THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright© 1973, 1978,
1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™. Used by permission of Zondervan

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: ISerg / iStock / Getty Images Plus

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer International Publishing
AG part of Springer Nature.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Contents

1 The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory   1

Servant Leadership According to Greenleaf    1
Servant Leadership in Twenty-First-Century Literature    3
Servant Leadership According to Patterson and Winston    5
Servant Leadership Research   8
The Next Steps in Leadership    9
Conclusion  10
References  10

2 Servant Leadership in Context  13

In the Context of Leadership Theory   13
In the Context of Followers   14
In the Context of the Business World   17
In the Context of the Church World   19
In the Global Context   21
Conclusion  22
References  23

3 The Strengths of Servant Leadership  25

Values-Driven Leadership  26
Effective and Ethical Leadership   28
Servant Leadership and Organizational Culture   29
v
vi Contents

Servant Leadership and Leadership Development   30

The Goals of Servant Leadership   32
Servant Leadership and the Negative   34
Conclusion  35
References  36

4 Servant Leadership in the Old Testament  39

Examples of Leaders in the Old Testament   41
Genesis: Joseph  41
Exodus 3 and 18: Moses   44
Esther 4–5: Esther   51
Instructions for Leaders in the Old Testament   52
God as the Model Leader in the Old Testament   53
Pictures of Leaders in the Old Testament   53
Shepherd: Kings, Priests, Elders   53
Suffering Servant: Isaiah 52–53   54
Levites  55
The Prophets as Servants: Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Elijah   56
The Texts of Servant Leadership in the Old Testament   57
2 Sam. 17:27–29; 19:31–40; 1 Kings 2:7—Barzillai  57
1 Kings 3: Solomon  58
Nehemiah  58
1 Samuel: David and Saul  60
The Failure of Leadership in the Old Testament   63
Judges: Samson, Gideon   63
Prophets: Elisha’s Servant   65
Shepherds Who Failed Jeremiah 23, Ezekiel 34   66
The Failure of Moses   70
Servant Leadership or Shepherd Leadership   71
Leadership Lessons from the Old Testament   71
Conclusion  72
References  72

5 Servant Leadership in the Life of Jesus  75

Instructions About Serving   76
Mark 10  76
Matthew 28  82
 Contents
   vii

John 13, John 21   84

Luke 7  87
Jesus as the Example of Servant Leadership   89
1 Peter 2   89
Phil 2  90
Conclusion  93
References  94

6 Leadership in the New Testament  97

Servant Leadership in the Book of Acts   98
Barnabas  98
Aeneas  99
Priscilla and Aquila  100
Peter as the Servant Leader  100
Instructions to Leaders  103
Servant Leadership in the Epistles  105
Romans and Corinthians  105
The Prison Epistles  113
The Pastoral Epistles  117
The General Epistles  123
Apocalyptic Servant Leadership  126
Other Leadership Issues and Models in the New Testament  127
Leadership Lessons from the New Testament  128
Conclusion 131
References 131

7 Biblical Servant Leadership 135

Biblical Concepts for Servant Leadership  135
Biblical Love in Leadership  141
The Difference and the Cohesion in the Servant
Leadership Models  145
Moving from Concept to Application  146
Application in the Business World  148
Application in the Church World  149
Conclusion 150
References 151
viii Contents

8 A Call for Biblical Leadership 153

Existing Research on Biblical Leadership  153
Moving on in Biblical Leadership  154
Application of Biblical Leadership  158
Biblical Leadership: Pioneers or Settlers  159
Conclusion 163
References 165

Index 167
 List of Figures

Fig. 5.1 Chiasm from Mark 10:45 79

Fig. 6.1 Biblical model of leadership from 1 Timothy 3:1–7 122
Fig. 7.1 Biblical servant leadership 148
Fig. 8.1 Biblical leadership 157

ix
 List of Tables

Table 4.1 Repetitive and progressive texture of scenes of Exodus 3:1–15 45

Table 4.2 Contrasts of shepherding from bad leadership 69
Table 5.1 Mark 10:42–45 patterns 79
Table 5.2 The progression of the life of Christ 92
Table 6.1 Contrasts for shepherd leaders 102
Table 6.2 The inner texture of I Timothy 3:1–7 119

xi
 Introduction

Though leadership has been an issue of discussion for many centuries, as

well as among recent researchers, there has been little agreement on the
description of leadership. In the twentieth century, leadership has been a
topic of study by researchers with no consensus on the definition of lead-
ership, but only that it concerns influence in the accomplishment of
group objectives (House, Hanges, Javidian, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004).
This vast array of differing conceptions of leadership has created a bewil-
dering body of literature with differences from one writer to another in
the field of leadership (Yukl, 2012). However, in the midst of this discus-
sion has entered the concept of spirituality as found in the Hebrew and
Christian Scriptures and its impact on leadership. Weber (1968) based
his concepts for religious leadership upon the lives of certain religious
leaders, like Moses, Buddha, Mohammed, and Jesus. Nevertheless,
McClymond (2001) found it striking that there was not much discussion
of religious leadership among scholars in the twentieth century. Yet, with
the turn of the twenty-first century, there has been a turn to spirituality
in leadership studies (Bekker, 2008). This turn to spirituality has included
the development of theories of leadership with a spiritual component like
spiritual leadership (Fry, 2003), servant leadership (Patterson, 2003), and
authentic leadership (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, & May, 2004;
Klenke, 2007). This turn to spirituality in leadership studies has also
included distinctively Christian leadership models like kenotic leadership
xiii
xiv Introduction

(Bekker, 2006). This is not to say that spirituality and servant leadership
are the same. In addition, this does not mean that this turn to spirituality
is necessarily Christian with a focus on biblical foundations for leader-
ship. Servant leadership exists without the issues of spirituality. However,
this turn to spirituality with a focus on biblical concepts could inform
not only servant leadership but other forms of leadership as well. Many
have discussed leadership in the context of Christianity and Scripture
including Augustine, Martin Luther, and the writers of the Christian
Scriptures (Guinness, 2000). Some of the writers of Christian Scriptures
who addressed leadership were Mark, Paul, and Peter. Research has been
done by some authors on the impact of the writers of Christian Scripture
and the ministry of Jesus (Bekker, 2006; Self, 2009; Zarate, 2009) on
contemporary leadership. Clinton (2012) developed leadership emer-
gence theory based upon his broad study of leaders in the Hebrew and
Christian Scriptures as well.
Nevertheless, this source for leadership theory needs further investiga-
tion for at least two reasons. First, this is a new area of research for con-
temporary leadership that has only gained ascendancy since the turn of
the century. Second, this is a broad source for research in the area of
leadership and much more needs to be done to develop profundity as well
as breadth from this rich resource of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures.
In response to this need, some scholarly journals have begun in the
twenty-first century, such as The Journal for Biblical Perspectives in
Leadership and The Journal of Religious Leadership, to promote research in
the areas of Christian Scriptures, Christian spirituality, and leadership. In
this area of research, there is much to be examined and gained for con-
temporary leadership development and understanding. In contemporary
leadership, one result of neglecting the spiritual dimension in leadership
is a void of values, and in response to many public failures, a movement
of spirituality is awakening in businesses across the country (Gibbons,
2008). In the context of this nexus of the Scriptures and leadership, pos-
sibly there is a way to discover new models for effective leadership for the
future. Many contemporary theories of leadership have focused primarily
on behavior like leadership practices (Kouzes & Posner, 2017), transfor-
mational leadership, and the skills or style approach (Northouse, 2015),
while others focused on the culture of the organization (Cameron &
Quinn, 2011) including an emphasis on changing leadership behavior.
 Introduction
   xv

Yet, leadership is not just behaviors or styles; it involves internal issues

as well. Internal issues such as character. Character is central to good
leadership and character is the inner form that makes a person who he/
she is and it provides the leader’s deepest source of bearings (Guinness,
2000). The issue of personhood or ontology comes to the fore in this
discussion and involves spirituality particularly as found in the Christian
Scriptures. This is important in that leadership as seen in the Scriptures is
ontological in that leadership proceeds from the being of the person and
not just the behavior of the person. Though those like Machiavelli
(1515/2016) said that internal issues such as character and integrity are
not important components of leadership, writers of the Scriptures dis-
agree. In 1 Peter, Peter exhorted the leaders to follow the example of
Jesus—Jesus set the example of servant leadership, but this concept per-
meates the pages of both Old and New Testaments. Therefore, the writ-
ings of the Scripture need thorough examination for understanding
teaching concerning servant leadership and leadership in general and its
proper appropriation for contemporary contexts. In this search, it is pos-
sible that even better models for leadership could be discovered from the
wisdom of antiquity.
Leadership studies do not generally embrace theology in the process of
research (Ayers, 2006). However, in the past, theology or research from
the Scriptures has been a valuable source of research. Medieval theolo-
gians believed that theology was the queen of the sciences (i.e. of the
domains of knowledge) and philosophy was her handmaid; but in our
day, theology has been largely banished from the university (DeWeese &
Moreland, 2005). Theology has fallen from this place of prominence to be
replaced by pragmatism and empiricism. Instead of searching for truth in
theological foundations, truth is now sought in answering questions of
function. Does it work in accomplishing the objectives? If something
accomplishes certain determined objectives, then it is assumed that it is
true and this truth is used for developing a theory. Nevertheless, this is
quite Aristotelian that truth lies in the physical world. It would be more
productive to find truth then apply it to the physical world, a move from
internals to externals. While this sounds Platonic, it is not Platonic
­thinking that drives this as much as theological thinking. Thinking theo-
logically is a view from the perspective of divine intention and prerogative
xvi Introduction

rather than a view from below which is anthropological—an effort to find

truth as it happens—and is troubled by misshapen self-issues. Many times
science asks for an outside objective viewpoint, but is that possible when
we study ourselves and we are the researcher and the researched? Theology
from Scripture lifts us out of this research circle so we can catch a glimpse
from above concerning the human issue of leadership. Nevertheless, the-
ology is not unacquainted with the necessity of circularity since no quest
for truth can escape from the necessity of this hermeneutic circle, linking
the encounter with reality to an interpretive point of view, so science and
theology are joined in a relationship of mutual illumination and correc-
tion (Polkinghorne, 2007). Scripture must be brought back to the research
arena, not to displace science, but as a partner in a search for truth that is
more than empirical. Science and theology are both concerned with the
search for truth, and they share common ways of approaching this search
for understanding as well as sharing a common conviction that there is
truth to be sought (Polkinghorne, 2007). Therefore, it is in this conver-
gence of science or research and theology from Scripture that truth is
sought for leadership in the contemporary setting.
The ramifications for leadership from the principles of Scripture are sig-
nificant. This is a way of leadership and leadership development that is not
only countercultural but also sensitive to eternal issues of theology that are
important. This leadership in Scripture is specifically designed for leading
the church in antiquity and in contemporary settings as well. The implica-
tions are that if the biblical foundation for leadership could be found, it
could bring new ground for effectiveness. This then would have implica-
tions for leadership in multiple contexts in the twenty-first century includ-
ing business, education, and government settings as well as in the church.

References
Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, W. O., & May, D. (2004). Unlocking
the Mask: A Look at the Process by Which Authentic Leaders Impact Follower
Attitudes and Behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 801–823.
Ayers, M. (2006). Towards a Theology of Leadership. Journal of Biblical
Perspectives in Leadership, 1, 3–27.
 Introduction
   xvii

Bekker, C. J. (2006). The Philippians Hymn (2:5–11) as an Early Mimetic

Christological Model of Christian Leadership in Roman Philippi. Paper pre-
sented at the Servant Leadership Research Roundtable.
Bekker, C. J. (2008). The Turn to Spirituality and Downshifting. In
F. Ghandolphi & H. Cherrier (Eds.), Downshifting: A Theoretical and Practical
Approach to Living a Simple Life. Hyderabad, India: ICFAI Press.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2011). Diagnosing and Changing Organizational
Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Clinton, J. R. (2012). The Making of a Leader. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.
DeWeese, G. J., & Moreland, J. P. (2005). Philosophy Made Slightly Less Difficult.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a Theory of Spiritual Leadership. The Leadership
Quarterly, 14(6), 693–727.
Gibbons, S. (2008). Spiritual Formation: The Basis for All Leading. Inner
Resources for Leaders, 1, 1–9.
Guinness, O. (2000). When No One Sees: The Importance of Character in an Age
of Image. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidian, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004).
Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Klenke, K. (2007). Authentic Leadership: A Self, Leader, and Spiritual Identity
Perspective. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(1), 68–97.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). The Leadership Challenge: How to Make
Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley
and Sons).
Machiavelli, N. (2016). The Prince (W. K. Marriott, Trans.). Retrieved from
www.gutenberg.org/files/1232/1232-h/1232-h.htm (Original Work
Published 1515).
McClymond, M. J. (2001). Prophet or Loss? Reassessing Max Weber’s Theory
of Religious Leadership. In D. N. Freedman & M. J. McClymond (Eds.), The
Rivers of Paradise: Moses, Buddha, Confucius, Jesus, and Muhammed as Religious
Leaders. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and Practice (Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage).
Patterson, K. A. (2003). Servant Leadership: A Theoretical Model. Paper presented
at the Servant Leadership Roundtable.
Polkinghorne, J. (2007). Quantum Physics and Theology: An Unexpected Kinship.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
xviii Introduction

Self, C. (2009). Love and Organizational Leadership: An Intertexture Analysis

of 1 Corinthians 13 (Doctoral dissertation). Dissertation Abstracts
International: SectionA, 70(10). (UMI No. 337775).
Weber, M. (1968). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology.
New York, NY: Bedminster Press.
Yukl, G. A. (2012). Leadership in Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Zarate, M. (2009). The Leadership Approach of Jesus in Matthew 4 and 5
(Doctoral dissertation). Dissertation Abstracts International: SectionA, 70(10).
(UMI No. 3377777).
 1
The Foundation of Servant
Leadership Theory

The ideas and concepts for servant leadership have been around for cen-
turies in different forms. Even when Aristotle and later Aquinas discussed
leadership, they pondered the concepts of virtues as an important com-
ponent of human life and leadership. Other philosophers such as Plato
discussed leadership but with some different ideas that became main-
stream ideas for ruling and power. This focus on power carried the day in
leadership thinking with concepts of leadership like in Machiavelli’s The
Prince that endorsed a power center to leadership. This power focus on
leadership developed over the centuries, while in other contexts alterna-
tive concepts for leadership became part of the lived experiences of lead-
ers. Diverse concepts for leaders were lived and developed, but the power
focus of leadership rose to ascendancy over the years.

Servant Leadership According to Greenleaf

In the 1970s, in the midst of a hotbed of leadership theory develop-
ment, Robert Greenleaf proposed an idea about the servant being the
leader. According to Greenleaf (2002), his book on servant leadership
was written through a process of 20 years of talks and articles with the

© The Author(s) 2018 1

S. Crowther, Biblical Servant Leadership, Christian Faith Perspectives in
Leadership and Business, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89569-7_1
2 S. Crowther

hope and design that leaders would learn to serve their followers with
skill, understanding, and spirit. This idea grew into a concept of leader-
ship in the writings of Greenleaf that was developed and popularized in
the writings of Greenleaf and later with several other authors like Larry
Spears. Greenleaf (2002) believed that there were students who were
looking for a better way to lead and there were others as well like trustees
and clergy in the churches who wanted more effective models for leader-
ship. He introduced this way of leading as leading as a servant. He sum-
marizes his concept of this type of leader as one who is servant first and
this begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve but then
there is a conscious choice from there that one wants to lead (Greenleaf,
2002). The movement then is not from leading to serving but from serv-
ing to leading.
This way of thinking calls for a new kind of leadership model that
puts serving others as the top priority including employees, customers,
and the community at large and a number of institutions have adopted
this servant-leader approach (Spears, 1998). This model has been
adopted, discussed, and lived by many in several different fields. As this
model has moved from theory to practice, there are others who have
developed and adapted this model in many different contexts. There are
business leaders who have practiced this model for over 25 years and
continue to use it, and this leadership thinking has also influenced many
noted writers, thinkers, and leaders (Spears, 1998). The influence and
popularity of this way of thinking about leadership grew through the
later twentieth century.
In this process, ten characteristics for servant leadership were developed
from the writings of this model. The ten characteristics of servant leader-
ship were identified as listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion,
conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of
people, and building community (Spears, 1998). These ten concepts have
been researched and developed for use as components of servant leader-
ship with good progress of this model as an effective form of leadership.
Servant leadership is viewed as a leadership model that is helpful to orga-
nizations by engaging and developing employees and beneficial to follow-
ers by engaging people as whole persons with heart, mind, and spirit and
 The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory 3

it is not limited to Western culture (Van Dierendonck & Patterson, 2010).

Greenleaf (2002) even discusses many different contexts in his later chap-
ters as he addresses the issues of cross-cultural leadership.
Then his final chapter turns to the inward journey through the use of
poetry and Scripture. Though this is the foundation of servant leadership
from an organizational perspective, it has some beginnings of looking to
Scripture and particularly the life and ministry of Jesus as a model for
leadership. These early concepts have been the fountainhead of much
discussion and debate about this philosophy or model or principle of
leadership. This thinking began in the 1970s with Robert Greenleaf how-
ever; others in the twenty-first century began to think and do research on
this way of leading to develop a robust model for effective leadership.

 ervant Leadership in Twenty-First-Century

S
Literature
In the twenty-first century, there was an explosion of literature in many
areas of leadership theory and thinking. Some of these areas included
virtues and even spirituality as an important component of leadership
and leadership development. It was in the early years of this century that
authentic leadership was developed as a result of the large scandals in the
business world of this time period. As it was developed, there was a spiri-
tual component of this model developed by Klenke (2007). There were
other theories as well like adaptive leadership theory (Northouse, 2015).
In this context, there emerged several new ideas and models concern-
ing servant leadership. Just before the turn of the century, Spears (1998)
had already been developing some of the concepts of servant leadership
in cooperation with other leadership scholars and practitioners such as
Stephen Covey, Peter Senge, James Kouzes, Margaret Wheatley, and oth-
ers. They were exploring different aspects of servant leadership based on
the Greenleaf model of leadership.
As the twenty-first century dawned, there were ideas and new priorities
in leadership thinking and development. Northouse (2015) described
servant leadership as a theory that did not have much empirical evidence
4 S. Crowther

with most of the writing on this model being prescriptive rather than
focusing on the practice of this way of leadership however; in the twenty-­
first century, more evidence and research had substantiated and clarified
this model. Servant leadership was used by different organizations and
endorsed by leadership thinkers and writers, but it still needed further
development for use as a theory of leadership. So, the twenty-first century
brought an explosion of research in new areas of leadership and leader-
ship development. In this explosion of research, several scholars devel-
oped different and diverse attributes and measurements for servant
leadership (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Dennis & Bocarnea, 2005; Laub,
1999; Van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011; Wong & Davey, 2007). In
these studies, the characteristics were both extensive and diverse with a
lack of agreement on the characteristics that define servant leadership
(Northouse, 2015).
In the midst of this time period, Patterson (2003) developed a model
that is virtue based for leadership. This model was further clarified and
explained by Winston (2003), who defined and expanded some of the
terms used in this model of leadership. The literature concerning servant
leadership continues to grow with more variations. However, since this
Patterson model is virtue based, it has potential for more development
and growth.
In addition, the issues of the twenty-first century have focused on
developing ethical models of leadership or at least developing models
with ethics in mind for the process of leadership development. This focus
of leadership studies in general brings this model of servant leadership to
an important place to be examined and developed for use in this present
context. The question remains as to how leadership models can be devel-
oped that can produce effective and ethical leaders. Ciulla (2014) pro-
poses that leadership needs to be good in two senses, ethical and effective.
It is this search for good leadership in these two senses that drives the
passion for the development of this model for servant leadership. But is
this enough? Is there more beyond this model that serves leaders in their
pursuit of good and even great leadership that includes virtues as well as
effectiveness? Then the question goes even farther in asking if these are
the only two components of good leadership. To answer these questions
it takes a deeper look at this Patterson model.
 The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory 5

 ervant Leadership According to Patterson

S
and Winston
Some of the foundational ideas for the further development of servant
leadership came from Winston and Patterson. Winston gave some new
terminology for this construct in using the word agapao for the leadership
idea of love. Patterson developed a virtue-based model for servant leader-
ship that built upon the ideas of Greenleaf but expanded it. In her model,
the virtues of leadership are the central issue however; it is done in such a
way that it facilitates the ability to research this theory of leadership for
further development.
According to Patterson, servant leadership is based on love (2010).
However, there are more virtues that come from this foundation of love
producing a virtuous model of leadership. There are seven virtuous con-
structs in this model of servant leadership. These seven constructs are
agapao love, humility, altruism, vision, trust, empowerment, and service
(Patterson, 2003). These constructs interact with each other ultimately
expressing service to others. It begins the process with love or agapao.
According to Winston (2002), this is the Greek term for moral love; it is
to love in a social or moral sense. Fortunately, Greek has several Greek
words for different ideas where we use only one word in English.
Therefore, it is important to understand this word in this social context.
It is where the leader considers the needs of the followers and where the
leader considers each person as a total person with unique needs, desires,
and wants even learning about the giftings and talents of each follower
(Patterson, 2003). Love in this way is important in an organizational set-
ting. Love in leadership is an atmosphere where respect, trust, and dig-
nity are fostered and this is where followers can thrive and this love
becomes a force that changes lives of both follower and leader (Van
Dierendonck & Patterson, 2010). It is here in the foundation that there
can be seen a difference between this model and the Greenleaf model.
The Greenleaf model begins with the desire to serve, while the Patterson
model begins with moral and social love as the foundation. Does this
make enough of a difference? Both are based on the model of serving
first. Many of the other discussions on servant leadership have this
­concept of serving first. However, the Patterson model develops through
6 S. Crowther

virtuous constructs rather than behaviors. This then makes it a model

that can be developed using internal issues of the person rather than
external behaviors. It is then ontological in nature in that it deals with the
person of the leader first rather than the external behaviors first. This
could be more of a challenge for development, but it makes it more open
to research that deals with internal issues like dealt with in Scripture and
the issues of character.
The model then moves from the issue of love to humility. This is an
often missed but a key ingredient of good leadership. There is a growing
call for humility in leadership in spite of the fixation on charismatic
appeal for leaders (Morris, Brotheridge, & Urbanski, 2005). Collins
(2001) even declares that deep personal humility is one of the only two
important ingredients for great leadership. Others have discussed this
connection between servant leadership and humility as well (Anderson,
2008; Greenleaf, 2002; Winston, 2002). However, it is important to
understand this concept of humility. It is not a low opinion of self.
Humility is a personal orientation based upon the willingness to see self
accurately putting oneself in perspective with neither self-abasement nor
overly positive self-regard (Morris et al., 2005). This concept of humility
in connection with leadership is a growing discussion but it fits well
within the framework of this model of servant leadership.
Then altruism is the next virtue in this model servant leadership.
Altruism is that which benefits another person often involving risk or
sacrifice for one’s own personal interests (Kaplan, 2000). This virtue
would involve the servant leader overcoming significant self-issues like
insecurities and overt self-interest. Vision is the next attribute in connec-
tion to this model. Vision is rarely considered a virtue. It is an important
component for many models of leadership including some of the more
contemporary models like transformational leadership. However, this
vision becomes a virtue when it is focused on the vision for the follower
rather than for the organization. The servant leader’s focus is on the indi-
vidual and this vision is looking forward and seeing the individual as a
viable and worthy person and helping that individual become that person
(Patterson, 2003). The vision is for the individual and how they can
become a better person in a holistic sense, not just as a function at a job.
This sets this model apart in that the other models of leadership focus on
 The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory 7

vision for the strategy of the organization whereas here the vision is to
develop the followers in the organization who impact the organization
but the goal is the follower first. Servant leaders are focused on their fol-
lowers seeing them for who they can become and serving them as such
whereby the followers are the primary concern (Dennis, Kinzler-Norheim,
& Bocarnea, 2010). Servant leadership in this way focuses on the fol-
lower through addressing internal issues in the leader.
Trust is the next virtue in servant leadership here in this model and
way of doing leadership. Trust is seen as part of the transforming influ-
ence of servant leadership by Sendjaya (2010) and he calls unreserved
trust one of the ingredients for the transformation of followers in many
dimensions. Trust is one of the ingredients produced in an atmosphere of
love in leadership (Van Dierendonck & Patterson, 2010). Trust can be
seen in two directions. The first direction is the follower trusting the
leader but the second direction is the leader trusting the follower. So,
trust needs to flow in both directions. However, trust coming from the
leader can help develop trust in the follower. This cannot produce trust
from the follower without the leader being trustworthy. This is where
servant leadership enters the equation. Trust is built upon the other attri-
butes of this model of leadership. When the leader expresses moral love
and altruism with good in the heart of the leader for the followers in the
context of true humility, the leader builds a solid foundation for trust—
trust from the followers. In addition, humble leaders recognize their own
shortcoming, and with this revelation, they are able to more readily trust
other imperfect individuals. Excellence is not perfection; it is much more
than perfection. Perfection is in meeting a certain expectation fully.
Nevertheless, excellence is to exceed expectations with a learning process
as a result of failures and successes. Excellence, to work correctly, needs to
be filled with grace and proper motive. Perfection is a hard task master
but excellence is an easy yoke that is filled with expectation instead of
fear. So, what is trust? Trust has to do with being predictable and reliable
and integrity makes a leader worthy of trust (Northouse, 2015). Trust is
the confident relationship built between people who can be relied upon
even in difficult situations. People you can trust whether followers or
leaders are those who will not throw you under the bus when times are
difficult. Collins (2001) says that great leaders are the ones who give
8 S. Crowther

credit to followers when all is well and progress is made, but then when
there is trouble or hindrance, the leader looks at his/her own contribu-
tions as the problem. He calls this humility. However, this is also trust,
trust in others and building a foundation of trust from others.
The final virtue and the ultimate virtue in servant leadership is that of
service or to serve. The idea of servant is deep in the Judeo-Christian heri-
tage yet society appears to be a low-caring society with some notable
servants but they seem to be losing ground to the nonserving people
(Spears, 1998). This confusion adds to the dilemma in defining and then
living as a servant in contemporary society. Where are the contemporary
role models for this important ingredient? This is why Guinness (2003)
laments the lack of heroes in our day when people are famous for being
famous rather than for some exceptional quality or deed like putting oth-
ers first. Service is a virtue in giving of oneself with generosity toward
others in a variety of ways including giving time, compassion, and even
of physical belongings (Patterson, 2003). To serve is to give of self when
it is not an obligation; it is not a mandate to be fulfilled but a passion for
others to be lived and done with compassion. However, even these words
like “compassion” must be used carefully since there are so many who
would define these concepts of giving, or serving or even compassion in
various ways with practical implications as each definition takes root and
heads in different directions. Therefore, the need is seen here for more
research in these areas to seek out the nuances and the veracity of this
theory. In addition, as these attributes are examined, they will need defi-
nitions that can bear the weight of this theory of leadership.

Servant Leadership Research

As of today, there have been several other authors who have entered this
field of research for servant leadership doing research in different cultures
and contexts. Research has been done in African nations, in military con-
texts, and based upon the life and teachings of Jesus. As research has been
done, some have begun to develop theories that are sensitive to these
contexts, like Wilkes (1998) who developed a concept for leadership
based upon the life and teachings of Jesus or Bell (2014) who developed
 The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory 9

leadership principles from both Old and New Testaments based upon the
servant models found in Scripture. Many scholars have worked on devel-
oping a model of servant leadership recently. Among these scholars are
Patterson (2003) and Winston (2003), but there are others as well like
Russell (2001). These scholars have used differing theories and developed
different models. In this process, some have begun to look at Hebrew and
Christian Scriptures for a foundation for this theory as well as insight for
nuances to improve this model of leadership.

The Next Steps in Leadership

In this endeavor, as some researchers have begun to look at the Hebrew
and Christian Scriptures for guidance, there is a call for a more developed
theory of leadership. This call is to analyze the best theoretical models in
conjunction with divine insights from the text of Scripture. This is a call
to think theologically from the perspective of foundations for leadership.
Thinking theologically is a view from the perspective of divine intention
and prerogative rather than a view from below which is anthropological
(which is finding truth as it happens but it is troubled by distorted self-­
issues). Science asks for an outside objective viewpoint but is that possible
when we study ourselves wherein we are the researcher and the researched?
Theology lifts us out of this research circle so we can catch a glimpse from
above concerning the human issue of leadership. This study expands this
research in looking to the Scriptures in cooperation with the science of
organizational leadership for divine perspective on servant leadership and
its implications for leadership that can be applied in the multiple con-
texts of the twenty-first century, to the church, government, military,
nonprofits, education, and the world of business. Science and theology
are both concerned with search for truth. They share common ways of
approaching this search for understanding and a common conviction
that there is truth to be sought (Polkinghorne, 2007). The question is
whether the Scriptures endorse, critique, or expand the concept of ser-
vant leadership. Further, the deeper question is whether the Scriptures
provide a model of leadership other than servant leadership or that builds
beyond this model of leadership.
10 S. Crowther

Conclusion
There are many models that have built upon the concept of servant lead-
ership as described by Greenleaf (2002). In this research, there is one
model that is virtue based developed by Patterson (2003) that will be
analyzed in this contemporary context and compared to the Hebrew and
Christian Scriptures. The contemporary organizational theory and the
examination of Scripture will be brought together in looking for the
nuancing, confirming, critiquing, or challenging of this theory. The pur-
pose is to build a biblical construct for leadership using the foundation of
servant leadership but moving beyond these concepts to embrace other
words and concepts or principles for leadership.

References
Anderson, J. (2008). The Writings of Robert K. Greenleaf: An Interpretive Analysis
and the Future of Servant Leadership. Paper presented at the Servant Leadership
Research Roundtable.
Barbuto, J. E., Jr., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale Development and Construct
Clarification of Servant Leadership. Group & Organization Management,
31(3), 300–326.
Bell, S. (Ed.). (2014). Servants and Friends: A Biblical Theology if Leadership.
Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.
Ciulla, J. B. (2014). Ethics: The Heart of Leadership. Santa Barbara, CA:
ABC-CLIO.
Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap—And
Others Don’t. New York, NY: Harper Business.
Dennis, R. S., & Bocarnea, M. (2005). Development of the Servant Leadership
Assessment Instrument. Leadership and Organization Development Journal,
25(8), 600–615.
Dennis, R. S., Kinzler-Norheim, L., & Bocarnea, M. (2010). Servant Leadership
Theory: Development of the Servant Leadership Assessment Instrument. In
D. Van Dierendonck & K. A. Patterson (Eds.), Servant Leadership:
Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 169–179). New York, NY: Palgrave
Macmillan.
 The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory 11

Greenleaf, R. (2002). Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate

Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Guinness, O. (2003). The Call: Finding and Fulfilling the Central Purpose of Your
Life. Nashville, TN: W Publishing.
Kaplan, S. (2000). New Ways to Promote Proenvironmental Behavior: Human
Nature and Environmentally Responsible Behavior. Journal of Social Issues,
56(3), 491–508.
Klenke, K. (2007). Authentic Leadership: A Self, Leader, and Spiritual Identity
Perspective. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(1), 68–97.
Laub, J. (1999). Assessing the Servant Organization: Development of the
Servant Organizational Leadership (SOLA) Instrument. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 60(2), 308 (UMI No. 9921922).
Morris, A. J., Brotheridge, C. M., & Urbanski, J. C. (2005). Bringing Humility
to Leadership: Antecedents and Consequences of Leader Humility. Human
Relations, 58(10), 1323–1350.
Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Patterson, K. A. (2003). Servant Leadership: A Theoretical Model. Paper presented
at the Servant Leadership Roundtable.
Patterson, K. A. (2010). Servant Leadership and Love. In D. Van Dierendonck
& K. A. Patterson (Eds.), Servant Leadership: Developments in Theory and
Research (pp. 67–76). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Polkinghorne, J. (2007). Quantum Physics and Theology: An Unexpected Kinship.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Russell, R. F. (2001). The Role of Values in Servant Leadership. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 22, 76–84.
Sendjaya, S. (2010). Demystifying Servant Leadership. In D. Van Dierendonck
& K. A. Patterson (Eds.), Servant Leadership: Developments in Theory and
Research (pp. 39–51). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Spears, L. C. (Ed.). (1998). Insights into Leadership: Service, Stewardship, and
Servant Leadership. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
Van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The Servant Leadership Survey:
Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure. Journal of
Business & Psychology, 26(3), 249–267.
Van Dierendonck, D., & Patterson, K. A. (Eds.). (2010). Servant Leadership:
Developments in Theory and Research. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wilkes, C. G. (1998). Jesus on Leadership: Discovering the Secrets of Servant
Leadership from the Life of Christ. London: Lifeway Press.
12 S. Crowther

Winston, B. (2002). Be a Leader for God’s Sake. Virginia Beach, VA: Regent
University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship.
Winston, B. E. (2003). Extending Patterson’s Servant Leadership Model: Coming
Full Circle. Paper presented at Regent University’s Servant Leadership
Research Roundtable, Virginia Beach, VA. Retrieved from http://www.
regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml
Wong, P. T. P., & Davey, D. (2007). Best Practices in Servant Leadership. Regent
University Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings, 2007.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
fruitless search, they go away back to their dead bodies lying, it may
be, among the blackened ruins of their desolated home. Then the
victors come forth, and taking up the weapons from their hiding-
places, wash them clean of blood and bring them back to the
village.125.1 But “as more or less of the soul-stuff of their slain foes
always sticks to the victors, none of their people may touch them
after their return to the village. They are strictly shunned by their
friends for several days. People go shyly out of their way. If any one
in the village gets a pain in his stomach, it is assumed that he has
sat down on the place of one of the warriors. If somebody complains
of toothache, he must have eaten a fruit which had been touched by
one of the combatants. All the leavings of the men’s food must be
most carefully put out of the way, lest a pig should get at them, for
that would be the death of the animal. Therefore the remains of their
meals are burnt or buried. The warriors themselves cannot suffer
much from the soul-stuff of the foes, because they treat themselves
with the disinfecting sap of a creeper. But even so they are not
secure against all the dangers that threaten them from this
quarter.”125.2
Among the tribes at the mouth of the Wanigela
Customs observed River, in British New Guinea, “a man who has
by manslayers in
British New Guinea. taken life is considered to be impure until he has
undergone certain ceremonies: as soon as
possible after the deed he cleanses himself and his weapon. This
satisfactorily accomplished, he repairs to his village and seats
himself on the logs of sacrificial staging. No one approaches him or
takes any notice whatever of him. A house is prepared for him which
is put in charge of two or three small boys as servants. He may eat
only toasted bananas, and only the centre portion of them—the ends
being thrown away. On the third day of his seclusion a small feast is
prepared by his friends, who also fashion some new perineal bands
for him. This is called ivi poro. The next day the man dons all his
best ornaments and badges for taking life, and sallies forth fully
armed and parades the village. The next day a hunt is organised,
and a kangaroo selected from the game captured. It is cut open and
the spleen and liver rubbed over the back of the man. He then walks
solemnly down to the nearest water, and standing straddle-legs in it
washes himself. All young untried warriors swim between his legs.
This is supposed to impart his courage and strength to them. The
following day, at early dawn, he dashes out of his house, fully armed,
and calls aloud the name of his victim. Having satisfied himself that
he has thoroughly scared the ghost of the dead man, he returns to
his house. The beating of flooring boards and the lighting of fires is
also a certain method of scaring the ghost. A day later his
purification is finished. He can then enter his wife’s house.”126.1 In
this last case the true nature of such so-called purifications is clearly
manifest: they are in fact rites of exorcism observed for the purpose
of banning a dangerous spirit.
Amongst the Omaha Indians of North America a
Customs observed murderer whose life was spared by the kinsmen of
by murderers
among the Omaha his victim had to observe certain stringent rules for
Indians. a period which varied from two to four years. He
must walk barefoot, and he might eat no warm
food, nor raise his voice, nor look around. He had to pull his robe
around him and to keep it tied at the neck, even in warm weather; he
might not let it hang loose or fly open. He might not move his hands
about, but had to keep them close to his body. He might not comb
his hair, nor might it be blown about by the wind. No one would eat
with him, and only one of his kindred was allowed to remain with him
in his tent. When the tribe went hunting, he was obliged to pitch his
tent about a quarter of a mile from the rest of the people, “lest the
ghost of his victim should raise a high wind which might cause
damage.”126.2 The reason here alleged for banishing the murderer
from the camp of the hunters gives the clue to all the other
restrictions laid on him: he was haunted by the ghost and therefore
dangerous; hence people kept aloof from him, just as they are said
to have done from the ghost-ridden Orestes.
Among the Chinook Indians of Oregon and Washington, “when a
person has been killed, an old man who has a guardian spirit is
asked to work over the murderer. The old man
Ceremonies takes coal and mixes it with grease. He puts it on
observed by
homicides among to the face of the murderer. He gives him a head
the Chinook ring of cedar bark. Cedar bark is also tied around
Indians. his ankles and knees and around his wrists. For
five days he does not drink water. He does not sleep, and does not
lie down. He always stands. At night he walks about and whistles on
bone whistles. He always says ‘ä ä ä.’ For five days he does not
wash his face. Then on the next morning the old man washes his
face. He takes off that coal. He removes the black paint from his
face. He puts red paint on his face. A little coal is mixed with the red
paint. The old man puts this again on to his face. Sometimes this is
done by an old man, sometimes by an old woman. The cedar bark
which was tied to his legs and arms is taken off and buckskin straps
are tied around his arms and his legs. Now, after five days he is
given water. He is given a bucket, out of which he drinks. Now food
is roasted for him, until it is burned. When it is burned black it is
given to him. He eats standing. He takes five mouthsful, and no
more. After thirty days he is painted with new red paint. Good red
paint is taken. Now he carries his head ring and his bucket to a
spruce tree and hangs it on top of the tree. Then the tree will dry up.
People never eat in company of a murderer. He never eats sitting,
but always standing. When he sits down to rest he kneels on one
leg. The murderer never looks at a child and must not see people
while they are eating.”127.1 All these measures are probably intended
to rid the murderer of the clinging ghost of his victim, and to keep
him in quarantine till the riddance has been effected.
While the spirit of a murdered man is thus
Ghosts of slain feared by everybody, it is natural that it should be
kinsfolk, fellow-
townsmen, and specially dreaded by those against whom for any
fellow-clansfolk reason he may be conceived to bear a grudge. For
especially dreaded. example, among the Yabim of German New
Guinea, when the relations of a murdered man
have accepted a bloodwit instead of avenging his death, they must
allow the family of the victim to mark them with chalk on the brow.
Were this not done, the ghost of their dead kinsman might come and
trouble them for not doing their duty by him; he might drive away
their pigs or loosen their teeth.128.1 The ghosts of murdered kinsfolk
and neighbours are naturally more formidable than those of
foreigners and strangers; for their wrath is hotter and they have more
opportunities of wreaking their anger on the hard-hearted friends
who either did them to death with their own hands or left their blood
unavenged. Indeed some people only fear the wraiths of such
persons, and regard with indifference all other ghosts, let them mow
and gibber as much as they like. Thus among the Boloki of the
Upper Congo “a homicide is not afraid of the spirit of the man he has
killed when the slain man belongs to any of the neighbouring towns,
as disembodied spirits travel in a very limited area only; but when he
kills a man belonging to his own town he is filled with fear lest the
spirit shall do him some harm. There are no special rites that he can
observe to free himself from these fears, but he mourns for the slain
man as though he were a member of his own family. He neglects his
personal appearance, shaves his head, fasts for a certain period,
and laments with much weeping.”128.2 Again, a Kikuyu man does not
incur ceremonial pollution (thahu) by the slaughter of a man of
another tribe, nor even of his own tribe, provided his victim belongs
to another clan; but if the slain man is a member of the same clan as
his slayer, the case is grave indeed. However, it is possible by
means of a ceremony to bind over the ghost to keep the peace. For
this purpose the murderer and the oldest surviving brother of his
victim are seated facing each other on two trunks of banana trees;
here they are solemnly fed by two elders with vegetable food of all
kinds, which has been provided for the purpose by their mothers and
sprinkled with the contents of the stomach of a sacrificed sheep.
Next day the elders proceed to the sacred fig-tree (mugumo), which
plays a great part in the religious rites of the Akikuyu. There they
sacrifice a pig and deposit some of the fat, the intestines, and the
more important bones at the foot of the tree, while they themselves
feast on the more palatable parts of the animal. They think that the
ghost of the murdered man will visit the tree that very night in the
outward shape of a wild cat and consume the meat, and that this
offering will prevent him from returning to the village and troubling
the inhabitants.129.1
The Bare’e-speaking Toradjas of Central
Ghosts of the slain Celebes are greatly concerned about the souls of
dreaded by the
Toradjas of Central men who have been slain in battle. They appear to
Celebes. think that men who have been killed in war instead
of dying by disease have not exhausted their vital
energy and that therefore their departed spirits are more powerful
than the common ruck of ghosts; and as on account of the unnatural
manner of their death they cannot be admitted into the land of souls
they continue to prowl about the earth, furious with the foes who
have cut them off untimely in the prime of manhood, and demanding
of their friends that they shall wage war on the enemy and send forth
an expedition every year to kill some of them. If the survivors pay no
heed to this demand of the bloodthirsty ghosts, they themselves are
exposed to the vengeance of these angry spirits, who pay out their
undutiful friends and relatives by visiting them with sickness and
death. Hence with the Toradjas war is a sacred duty in which every
member of the community is bound to bear a part; even women and
children, who cannot wage real war, must wage mimic warfare at
home by hacking with bamboo swords at an old skull of the enemy,
while with their shrill voices they utter the war-whoop.129.2 Thus
among these people, as among many more tribes of savages, a
belief in the immortality of the soul has been one of the most fruitful
causes of bloodshed by keeping up a perpetual state of war between
neighbouring communities, who dare not make peace with each
other for fear of mortally offending the spirits of the dead.130.1
But, whether friends or foes, the ghosts of all
Ghosts of all who who have died a violent death are in a sense a
have died violent
deaths are public danger; for their temper is naturally soured
dangerous. How the and they are apt to fall foul of the first person they
Karens propitiate meet without nicely discriminating between the
such ghosts.
innocent and the guilty. The Karens of Burma, for
example, think that the spirits of all such persons go neither to the
upper regions of bliss nor to the nether world of woe, but linger on
earth and wander about invisible. They make men sick to death by
stealing their souls. Accordingly these vampire-like beings are
exceedingly dreaded by the people, who seek to appease their
anger and repel their cruel assaults by propitiatory offerings and the
most earnest prayers and supplications.130.2 They put red, yellow,
and white rice in a basket and leave it in the forest, saying: “Ghosts
of such as died by falling from a tree, ghosts of such as died of
hunger or thirst, ghosts of such as died by the tiger’s tooth or the
serpent’s fang, ghosts of the murdered dead, ghosts of such as died
of small-pox or cholera, ghosts of dead lepers, O ill-treat us not,
seize not upon our persons, do us no harm. O stay here in this
wood. We will bring hither red rice, yellow rice, and white rice for
your subsistence.”130.3
However, it is not always by fair words and
The angry ghosts of propitiatory offerings that the community attempts
the slain are
sometimes forcibly to rid itself of these invisible but dangerous
driven away with intruders. People sometimes resort to more
noise and clamour. forcible measures. “Once,” says a traveller among
the Indians of North America, “on approaching in
the night a village of Ottawas, I found all the inhabitants in confusion:
they were all busily engaged in raising noises of the loudest and
most inharmonious kind. Upon inquiry, I found that a battle had been
lately fought between the Ottawas and the Kickapoos, and that the
object of all this noise was to prevent the ghosts of the departed
combatants from entering the village.”131.1 Again, after the North
American Indians had burned and tortured a prisoner to death, they
used to run through the village, beating the walls, the furniture, and
the roofs of the huts with sticks and yelling at the pitch of their voices
to drive away the angry ghost of the victim, lest he should seek to
avenge the injuries done to his scorched and mutilated body.131.2
Similarly among the Papuans of Doreh in Dutch New Guinea, when
a murder has been committed in the village, the inhabitants
assemble for several evenings successively and shriek and shout to
frighten away the ghost, in case he should attempt to come
back.131.3 The Yabim, a tribe in German New Guinea, believe that
“the dead can both help and harm, but the fear of their harmful
influence is predominant. Especially the people are of opinion that
the ghost of a slain man haunts his murderer and brings misfortune
on him. Hence it is necessary to drive away the ghost with shrieks
and the beating of drums. The model of a canoe laden with taro and
tobacco is got ready to facilitate his departure.”131.4 So when the
Bukaua of German New Guinea have won a victory over their foes
and have returned home, they kindle a fire in the middle of the
village and hurl blazing brands in the direction of the battle-field,
while at the same time they make an ear-splitting din, to keep at bay
the angry spirits of the slain.131.5 When the cannibal Melanesians of
the Bismarck Archipelago have eaten a human body, they shout,
blow horns, shake spears, and beat the bushes for the purpose of
driving away the ghost of the man or woman whose flesh has just
furnished the banquet.131.6 The Fijians used to bury the sick and
aged alive, and having done so they always made a great uproar
with bamboos, shell-trumpets, and so forth in order to scare away
the spirits of the buried people and prevent them from returning to
their homes; and by way of removing any temptation to hover about
their former abodes they dismantled the houses of the dead and
hung them with everything that in their eyes seemed most
repulsive.132.1 Among the Angoni, a Zulu tribe settled to the north of
the Zambesi, warriors who have slain foes on an expedition smear
their bodies and faces with ashes, and hang garments of their
victims on their persons. This costume they wear for three days after
their return, and rising at break of day they run through the village
uttering frightful yells to banish the ghosts of the slain, which
otherwise might bring sickness and misfortune on the people.132.2
In Travancore the spirits of men who have died
Precautions taken a violent death by drowning, hanging, or other
against the ghosts
of executed means are supposed to become demons,
criminals and other wandering about to inflict injury in various ways
dangerous persons. upon mankind. Especially the ghosts of murderers
who have been hanged are believed to haunt the
place of execution and its neighbourhood. To prevent this it used to
be customary to cut off the criminal’s heels with a sword or to
hamstring him as he was turned off.132.3 The intention of thus
mutilating the body was no doubt to prevent the ghost from walking.
How could he walk if he were hamstrung or had no heels? With
precisely the same intention it has been customary with some
peoples to maim in various ways the dead bodies not only of
executed criminals but of other persons; for all ghosts are more or
less dreaded. When any bad man died, the Esquimaux of Bering
Strait used in the old days to cut the sinews of his arms and legs “in
order to prevent the shade from returning to the body and causing it
to walk at night as a ghoul.”132.4 The Omaha Indians said that when
a man was killed by lightning he should be buried face downwards,
and that the soles of his feet should be slit; for if this were not done,
his ghost would walk.133.1 The Herero of South Africa think that the
ghosts of bad people appear and are just as mischievous as in life;
for they rob, steal, and seduce women and girls, sometimes getting
them with child. To prevent the dead from playing these pranks the
Herero used to cut through the backbone of the corpse, tie it up in a
bunch, and sew it into an ox-hide.133.2 A simple way of disabling a
dangerous ghost is to dig up his body and decapitate it. This is done
by West African negroes and also by the Armenians; to make
assurance doubly sure the Armenians not only cut off the head but
smash it or stick a needle into it or into the dead man’s heart.133.3
The Hindoos of the Punjaub believe that if a
Precautions taken mother dies within thirteen days of her delivery,
in India against the
ghosts of women she will return in the guise of a malignant spirit to
who die in torment her husband and family. To prevent this
pregnancy, some people drive nails through her head and
childbed, or soon
after it. eyes, while others also knock nails on either side
of the door of the house.133.4 A gentler way of
attaining the same end is to put a nail or a piece of iron in the clothes
of the poor dead mother,133.5 or to knock nails into the earth round
the places where she died, and where her dead body was washed
and cremated. Some people put pepper in the eyes of the corpse to
prevent the ghost from seeing her way back to the house.133.6 In
Bilaspore, if a mother dies leaving very young children, they tie her
hands and feet before burial to prevent her from getting up by night
and going to see her orphaned little ones.134.1 The Oraons of Bengal
are firmly convinced that any woman who dies in pregnancy or
childbirth becomes an evil and dangerous spirit (bhut), who, if steps
are not taken to keep her off, will come back and tickle to death
those whom she loved best in life. “To prevent her, therefore, from
coming back, they carry her body as far away as they can, but no
woman will accompany her to her last resting-place lest similar
misfortune should happen to her. Arrived at the burial-place, they
break the feet above the ankle, twist them round, bringing the heels
in front, and then drive long thorns into them. They bury her very
deep with her face downwards, and with her they bury the bones of a
donkey, and pronounce the anathema, ‘If you come home may you
turn into a donkey’; the roots of a palm-tree are also buried with her;
and they say, ‘May you come home only when the leaves of the
palm-tree wither,’ and when they retire they spread mustard seeds
all along the road saying, ‘When you try to come home pick up all
these.’ They then feel pretty safe at home from her nocturnal visits,
but woe to the man who passes at night near the place where she
has been buried. She will pounce upon him, twist his neck, and leave
him senseless on the ground, until brought to by the incantations of a
sorcerer.”134.2 Among the Lushais of Assam, when a woman died in
childbed, the relatives offer a sacrifice to her departed soul, “but the
rest of that village treat the day as a holiday and put a small green
branch on the wall of each house on the outside near the doorpost to
keep out the spirit of the dead woman.”134.3
Among the Shans of Burma, when a woman
Precautions taken dies with an unborn child, it is believed that her
in Burma against
the ghosts of spirit turns into a malignant ghost, “who may return
women who die in to haunt her husband’s home and torment him,
pregnancy or unless precautions are taken to keep her away. To
childbed.
begin with, her unborn child is removed by an
operation; then mother and child are wrapped in separate mats and
buried without coffins. If this be not done, the same misfortune may
occur again to the woman, in her future life, and the widower will
suffer from the attacks of the ghost. When the bodies are being
removed from the house, part of the mat wall in the side of the house
is taken down, and the dead woman and her baby are lowered to the
ground through the aperture. The hole through which the bodies
have passed is immediately filled with new mats, so that the ghost
may not know how to return.”135.1 The Kachins of Burma are so
afraid of the ghosts of women dying in childbed that no sooner has
such a death taken place than the husband, the children, and almost
all the people in the house take to flight lest the ghost should bite
them. They bandage the eyes of the dead woman with her own hair
to prevent her from seeing anything; they wrap the corpse in a mat
and carry it out of the house not by the ordinary door, but by an
opening made for the purpose either in the wall or in the floor of the
room where she breathed her last. Then they convey the body to a
deep ravine where foot of man seldom penetrates, and there, having
heaped her clothes, her jewellery, and all her belongings over her,
they set fire to the pile and reduce the whole to ashes. “Thus they
destroy all the property of the unfortunate woman in order that her
soul may not think of coming to fetch it afterwards and to bite the
people in the attempt.” When this has been done, the officiating
priest scatters some burnt grain of a climbing plant (shămien),
inserts in the earth the pestle which the dead woman used to husk
the rice, and winds up the exorcism by cursing and railing at her
ghost, saying: “Wait to come back to us till this grain sprouts and this
pestle blossoms, till the fern bears fruit, and the cocks lay eggs.” The
house in which the woman died is generally pulled down, and the
timber may only be used as firewood or to build small hovels in the
fields. Till a new house can be built for them, the widower and the
orphans receive the hospitality of their nearest relatives, a father or a
brother; their other friends would not dare to receive them from fear
of the ghost. Occasionally the dead mother’s jewels are spared from
the fire and given away to some poor old crones, who do not trouble
their heads about ghosts. If the medicine-man who attended the
woman in life and officiated at the funeral is old, he may consent to
accept the jewels as the fee for his services; but in that case no
sooner has he got home than he puts the jewels in the henhouse. If
the hens remain quiet, it is a good omen and he can keep the
trinkets with an easy mind; but if the fowl flutter and cackle, it is a
sign that the ghost is sticking to the jewels, and in a fright he restores
them to the family. The old man or old woman into whose hands the
trinkets of the dead woman thus sometimes fall cannot dispose of
them to other members of the tribe; for nobody who knows where the
things come from would be so rash as to buy them. However, they
may find purchasers among the Shans or the Chinese, who do not
fear Kachin ghosts.136.1
The ghosts of women who die in childbed are
Precautions taken much dreaded in the Indian Archipelago; it is
in the Indian
Archipelago against supposed that they appear in the form of birds with
the ghosts of long claws and are exceedingly dangerous to their
women who die in husbands and also to pregnant women. A
childbed.
common way of guarding against them is to put an
egg under each armpit of the corpse, to press the arms close against
the body, and to stick needles in the palms of the hands. The people
believe that the ghost of the dead woman will be unable to fly and
attack people; for she will not spread out her arms for fear of letting
the eggs fall, and she will not clutch anybody for fear of driving the
needles deeper into her palms. Sometimes by way of additional
precaution another egg is placed under her chin, thorns are thrust
into the joints of her fingers and toes, her mouth is stopped with
ashes, and her hands, feet, and hair are nailed to the coffin.136.2
Some Sea Dyaks of Borneo sow the ground near
Attempts to lame cemeteries with bits of sticks to imitate caltrops, in
and otherwise
disable ghosts. order that the feet of any ghosts who walk over
them may be lamed.137.1 The Besisi of the Malay
Peninsula bury their dead in the ground and let fall knives on the
grave to prevent the ghost from getting up out of it.137.2 The
Tunguses of Turukhansk on the contrary put their dead up in trees,
and then lop off all the branches to prevent the ghost from
scrambling down and giving them chase.137.3 The Herbert River
natives in Queensland used to cut holes in the stomach, shoulders,
and lungs of their dead and fill the holes with stones, in order that,
weighed down with this ballast, the ghost might not stray far afield; to
limit his range still further they commonly broke his legs.137.4 Other
Australian blacks put hot coals in the ears of their departed brother;
this keeps the ghost in the body for a time, and allows the relations
to get a good start away from him. Also they bark the trees in a circle
round the spot, so that when the ghost does get out and makes after
them, he wanders round and round in a circle, always returning to
the place from which he started.137.5 The ancient Hindoos put fetters
on the feet of their dead that they might not return to the land of the
living.137.6 The Tinneh Indians of Alaska grease the hands of a
corpse, so that when his ghost grabs at people’s souls to carry them
off with him they slip through his greasy fingers and escape.138.1
Some peoples bar the road from the grave to
The way home prevent the ghost from following them. The
barricaded against
ghosts. Tunguses make the barrier of snow or trees.138.2
Amongst the Mangars, one of the fighting tribes of
Nepal, “when the mourners return home, one of their party goes
ahead and makes a barricade of thorn bushes across the road
midway between the grave and the house of the deceased. On the
top of the thorns he puts a big stone on which he takes his stand,
holding a pot of burning incense in his left hand and some woollen
thread in his right. One by one the mourners step on the stone and
pass through the smoke of the incense to the other side of the thorny
barrier. As they pass, each takes a piece of thread from the man who
holds the incense and ties it round his neck. The object of this
curious ceremony is to prevent the spirit of the dead man from
coming home with the mourners and establishing itself in its old
haunts. Conceived of as a miniature man, it is believed to be unable
to make its way on foot through the thorns, while the smell of the
incense, to which all spirits are highly sensitive, prevents it from
surmounting this obstacle on the shoulders of one of the
mourners.”138.3 The Chins of Burma burn their dead and collect the
bones in an earthen pot. Afterwards, at a convenient season, the pot
containing the bones is carried away to the ancestral burial-place,
which is generally situated in the depth of the jungle. “When the
people convey the pot of bones to the cemetery, they take with them
some cotton-yarn, and whenever they come to any stream or other
water, they stretch a thread across, whereby the spirit of the
deceased, who accompanies them, may get across it too. When they
have duly deposited the bones and food for the spirit in the cemetery
they return home, after bidding the spirit to remain there, and not to
follow them back to the village. At the same time they block the way
by which they return by putting a bamboo across the path.”139.1 Thus
the mourners make the way to the grave as easy as possible for the
ghost, but obstruct the way by which he might return from it.
The Algonquin Indians, not content with beating
Devices of the the walls of their huts to drive away the ghost,
North American
Indians to keep stretched nets round them in order to catch the
ghosts at bay. spirit in the meshes, if he attempted to enter the
house. Others made stinks to keep him off.139.2
The Ojebways also resorted to a number of devices for warding off
the spirits of the dead. These have been described as follows by a
writer who was himself an Ojebway: “If the deceased was a
husband, it is often the custom for the widow, after the burial is over,
to spring or leap over the grave, and then run zigzag behind the
trees, as if she were fleeing from some one. This is called running
away from the spirit of her husband, that it may not haunt her. In the
evening of the day on which the burial has taken place, when it
begins to grow dark, the men fire off their guns through the hole left
at the top of the wigwam. As soon as this firing ceases, the old
women commence knocking and making such a rattling at the door
as would frighten away any spirit that would dare to hover near. The
next ceremony is, to cut into narrow strips, like ribbon, thin birch
bark. These they fold into shapes, and hang round inside the
wigwam, so that the least puff of wind will move them. With such
scarecrows as these, what spirit would venture to disturb their
slumbers? Lest this should not prove effectual, they will also
frequently take a deer’s tail, and after burning or singeing off all the
hair, will rub the necks or faces of the children before they lie down
to sleep, thinking that the offensive smell will be another preventive
to the spirit’s entrance. I well remember when I used to be daubed
over with this disagreeable fumigation, and had great faith in it all.
Thinking that the soul lingers about the body a long time before it
takes its final departure, they use these means to hasten it
away.”140.1
The Lengua Indians of the Gran Chaco in South
Spirits of the dead America live in great fear of the spirits of their
greatly feared by
the Lengua Indians dead. They imagine that any one of these
of the Gran Chaco. disembodied spirits can become incarnate again
and take a new lease of life on earth, if only it can
contrive to get possession of a living man’s body during the
temporary absence of his soul. For like many other savages they
imagine that the soul absents itself from the body during sleep to
wander far away in the land of dreams. So when night falls, the
ghosts of the dead come crowding to the villages and lurk about,
hoping to find vacant bodies into which they can enter. Such are to
the thinking of the Lengua Indian the perils and dangers of the night.
When he awakes in the morning from a dream in which he seemed
to be hunting or fishing far away, he concludes that his soul cannot
yet have returned from such a far journey, and that the spirit within
him must therefore be some ghost or demon, who has taken
possession of his corporeal tenement in the absence of its proper
owner. And if these Indians dread the spirits of the departed at all
times, they dread them doubly at the moment when they have just
shuffled off the mortal coil. No sooner has a person died than the
whole village is deserted. Even if the death takes place shortly
before sunset the place must at all costs be immediately abandoned,
lest with the shades of night the ghost should return and do a
mischief to the villagers. Not only is the village deserted, but every
hut is burned down and the property of the dead man destroyed. For
these Indians believe that, however good and kind a man may have
been in his lifetime, his ghost is always a source of danger to the
peace and prosperity of the living. The night after his death his
disembodied spirit comes back to the village, and chilled by the cool
night air looks about for a fire at which to warm himself. He rakes in
the ashes to find at least a hot coal which he may blow up into a
flame. But if they are all cold and dead, he flings a handful of them in
the air and departs in dudgeon. Any Indian who treads on such
ashes will have ill-luck, if not death, following at his heels. To prevent
such mishaps the villagers take the greatest pains to collect and bury
all the ash-heaps before they abandon the village. What the fate of a
hamlet would be in which the returning ghost found the inhabitants
still among their houses, no Indian dares to imagine. Hence it
happens that many a village which was full of life at noon is a
smoking desert at sunset. And as the Lenguas ascribe all sickness
to the machinations of evil spirits and sorcerers, they mutilate the
persons of their dying or dead in order to counteract and punish the
authors of the disease. For this purpose they cut off the portion of
the body in which the evil spirit is supposed to have ensconced
himself. A common operation performed on the dying or dead man is
this. A gash is made with a knife in his side, the edges of the wound
are drawn apart with the fingers, and in the wound are deposited a
dog’s bone, a stone, and the claw of an armadillo. It is believed that
at the departure of the soul from the body the stone will rise up to the
Milky Way and will stay there till the author of the death has been
discovered. Then the stone will come shooting down in the shape of
a meteor and kill, or at least stun, the guilty party. That is why these
Indians stand in terror of falling stars. The claw of the armadillo
serves to grub up the earth and, in conjunction with the meteor, to
ensure the destruction of the evil spirit or the sorcerer. What the
virtue of the dog’s bone is supposed to be has not yet been
ascertained by the missionaries.141.1
The Bhotias, who inhabit the Himalayan district
A scapegoat for of British India, perform an elaborate ceremony for
ghosts.
transferring the spirit of a deceased person to an
animal, which is finally beaten by all the villagers and driven away,
that it may not come back. Having thus expelled the ghost the
people return joyfully to the village with songs and dances. In some
places the animal which thus serves as a scapegoat is a yak, the
forehead, back, and tail of which must be white. But elsewhere,
under the influence of Hindooism, sheep and goats have been
substituted for yaks.142.1
Widows and widowers are especially obnoxious
Precautions taken to the ghosts of their deceased spouses, and
by widows in Africa
against their accordingly they have to take special precautions
husbands’ ghosts. against them. For example, among the Ewe
negroes of Agome, in German Togoland, a widow
is bound to remain for six weeks in the hut where her husband lies
buried. She is naked, her hair is shaved off, and she is armed with a
stick with which to repel the too pressing familiarities of her
husband’s ghost; for were she to submit to them, she would die on
the spot. At night she sleeps with the stick under her, lest the wily
ghost should attempt to steal it from her in the hours of slumber.
Before she eats or drinks she always puts some coals on the food or
in the beverage, to prevent her dead husband from eating or drinking
with her; for if he did so, she would die. If any one calls to her, she
may not answer, for her dead husband would hear her, and she
would die. She may not eat beans or flesh or fish, nor drink palm-
wine or rum, but she is allowed to smoke tobacco. At night a fire is
kept up in the hut, and the widow throws powdered peppermint
leaves and red pepper on the flames to make a stink, which helps to
keep the ghost from the house.142.2
Among many tribes of British Columbia the conduct of a widow
and a widower for a long time after the death of their spouse is
 regulated by a code of minute and burdensome
Precautions taken restrictions, all of which appear to be based on the
by widows and
widowers in British notion that these persons, being haunted by the
Columbia against ghost, are not only themselves in peril, but are
the ghosts of their also a source of danger to others. Thus among the
spouses.
Shushwap Indians of British Columbia widows and
widowers fence their beds with thorn bushes to keep off the ghost of
the deceased; indeed they lie on such bushes, in order that the
ghost may be under little temptation to share their bed of thorns.
They must build a sweat-house on a creek, sweat there all night, and
bathe regularly in the creek, after which they must rub their bodies
with spruce branches. These branches may be used only once for
this purpose; afterwards they are stuck in the ground all round about
the hut, probably to fence off the ghost. The mourners must also use
cups and cooking vessels of their own, and they may not touch their
own heads or bodies. Hunters may not go near them, and any
person on whom their shadow were to fall would at once be ill.143.1
Again, among the Tsetsaut Indians, when a man dies his brother is
bound to marry the widow, but he may not do so before the lapse of
a certain time, because it is believed that the dead man’s ghost
haunts his widow and would do a mischief to his living rival. During
the time of her mourning the widow eats out of a stone dish, carries
a pebble in her mouth, and a crab-apple stick up the back of her
jacket. She sits upright day and night. Any person who crosses the
hut in front of her is a dead man. The restrictions laid on a widower
are similar.143.2 Among the Lkungen or Songish Indians, in
Vancouver Island, widow and widower, after the death of husband or
wife, are forbidden to cut their hair, as otherwise it is believed that
they would gain too great power over the souls and welfare of
others. They must remain alone at their fire for a long time and are
forbidden to mingle with other people. When they eat, nobody may
see them. They must keep their faces covered for ten days. For two
days after the burial they fast and are not allowed to speak. After that
they may speak a little, but before addressing any one they must go
into the woods and clean themselves in ponds and with cedar-
branches. If they wish to harm an enemy they call out his name
when they first break their fast, and they bite very hard in eating.
That is believed to kill their enemy, probably (though this is not said)
by directing the attention of the ghost to him. They may not go near
the water nor eat fresh salmon, or the fish might be driven away.
They may not eat warm food, else their teeth would fall out.144.1
Among the Bella Coola Indians the bed of a mourner is protected
against the ghost of the deceased by thorn-bushes stuck into the
ground at each corner. He rises early in the morning and goes out
into the woods, where he makes a square with thorn-bushes, and
inside of this square, where he is probably supposed to be safe from
the intrusion of the ghost, he cleanses himself by rubbing his body
with cedar-branches. He also swims in ponds, and after swimming
he cleaves four small trees and creeps through the clefts, following
the course of the sun. This he does on four subsequent mornings,
cleaving new trees every day. We may surmise that the intention of
creeping through the cleft trees is to give the slip to the ghost. The
mourner also cuts his hair short, and the cut hair is burnt. If he did
not observe these regulations, it is believed that he would dream of
the deceased, which to the savage mind is another way of saying
that he would be visited by his ghost. Amongst these Indians the
rules of mourning for a widower or widow are especially strict. For
four days he or she must fast and may not speak a word, else the
dead wife or husband would come and lay a cold hand on the mouth
of the offender, who would die. They may not go near water and are
forbidden to catch or eat salmon for a whole year. During that time
also they may not eat fresh herring or candle-fish (olachen). Their
shadows are deemed unlucky and may not fall on any person.144.2
Among the Thompson Indians of British
Precautions taken Columbia widows or widowers, on the death of
by widows and
widowers among their husbands or wives, went out at once and
the Thompson passed through a patch of rose-bushes four times.
Indians. The intention of this ceremony is not reported, but
we may conjecture that it was supposed to deter
the ghost from following for fear of scratching himself or herself on
the thorns. For four days after the death widows and widowers had
to wander about at evening or break of day wiping their eyes with fir-
twigs, which they hung up in the branches of trees, praying to the
Dawn. They also rubbed their eyes with a small stone taken from
under running water, then threw it away, while they prayed that they
might not become blind. The first four days they might not touch their
food, but ate with sharp-pointed sticks, and spat out the first four
mouthfuls of each meal, and the first four of water, into the fire. For a
year they had to sleep on a bed made of fir-branches, on which rose-
bush sticks were also spread at the foot, head, and middle. Many
also wore a few small twigs of rose-bush on their persons. The use
of the rose-bush was no doubt to keep off the ghost through fear of
the prickles. They were forbidden to eat fresh fish and flesh of any
kind for a year. A widower might not fish at another man’s fishing-
place or with another man’s net. If he did, it would make the station
and the net useless for the season. If a widower transplanted a trout
into another lake, before releasing it he blew on the head of the fish,
and after chewing deer-fat, he spat some of the grease out on its
head, so as to remove the baneful effect of his touch. Then he let it
go, bidding the fish farewell, and asking it to propagate its kind. Any
grass or branches upon which a widow or widower sat or lay down
withered up. If a widow were to break sticks or branches, her own
hands or arms would break. She might not cook food nor fetch water
for her children, nor let them lie down on her bed, nor should she lie
or sit where they slept. Some widows wore a breech-cloth made of
dry bunch-grass for several days, lest the ghost of her dead husband
should have connexion with her. A widower might not fish or hunt,
because it was unlucky both for him and for other hunters. He did not
allow his shadow to pass in front of another widower or of any
person who was supposed to be gifted with more knowledge or
magic than ordinary.145.1 Among the Lillooet Indians of British
Columbia the rules enjoined on widows and widowers were
somewhat similar. But a widower had to observe a singular custom
in eating. He ate his food with the right hand passed underneath his
right leg, the knee of which was raised.146.1 The motive for
conveying food to his mouth in this roundabout fashion is not
mentioned: we may conjecture that it was to baffle the hungry ghost,
who might be supposed to watch every mouthful swallowed by the
mourner, but who could hardly suspect that food passed under the
knee was intended to reach the mouth.
 Among the Kwakiutl Indians of British Columbia we are told “the
regulations referring to the mourning period are
Precautions taken very severe. In case of the death of husband or
by widows and wife, the survivor has to observe the following
widowers among
the Kwakiutl rules: for four days after the death the survivor
Indians. must sit motionless, the knees drawn up toward
the chin. On the third day all the inhabitants of the
village, including children, must take a bath. On the fourth day some
water is heated in a wooden kettle, and the widow or widower drips it
upon his head. When he becomes tired of sitting motionless, and
must move, he thinks of his enemy, stretches his legs slowly four
times, and draws them up again. Then his enemy must die. During
the following sixteen days he must remain on the same spot, but he
may stretch out his legs. He is not allowed, however, to move his
hands. Nobody must speak to him, and whosoever disobeys this
command will be punished by the death of one of his relatives. Every
fourth day he takes a bath. He is fed twice a day by an old woman at
the time of low water, with salmon caught in the preceding year, and
given to him in the dishes and spoons of the deceased. While sitting
so his mind is wandering to and fro. He sees his house and his
friends as though far, far away. If in his visions he sees a man near
by, the latter is sure to die at no distant day; if he sees him very far
away, he will continue to live long. After the sixteen days have
passed, he may lie down, but not stretch out. He takes a bath every
eighth day. At the end of the first month he takes off his clothing, and
dresses the stump of a tree with it. After another month has passed
he may sit in a corner of the house, but for four months he must not
mingle with others. He must not use the house door, but a separate
door is cut for his use. Before he leaves the house for the first time
he must three times approach the door and return, then he may
leave the house. After ten months his hair is cut short, and after a
year the mourning is at an end.”147.1
Though the reasons for the elaborate restrictions thus imposed on
widows and widowers by the Indians of British Columbia are not
always stated, we may safely infer that one and all they are dictated
by fear of the ghost, who, haunting the surviving spouse, surrounds
him or her with a dangerous atmosphere, a contagion of death,
which necessitates his seclusion both from the people themselves
and from the principal sources of their food supply, especially from
the fisheries, lest the infected person should poison them by his
malignant presence. We can, therefore,
Social ostracism of understand the extraordinary treatment of a
widowers in New
Guinea dictated by widower by the Papuans of Issoudun in British
fear of the ghosts of New Guinea. His miseries begin with the moment
their dead wives. of his wife’s death. He is immediately stripped of
all his ornaments, abused and beaten by his wife’s
relations, his house is pillaged, his gardens devastated, there is no
one to cook for him. He sleeps on his wife’s grave till the end of his
mourning. He may never marry again. By the death of his wife he
loses all his rights. It is civil death for him. Old or young, chief or
plebeian, he is no longer anybody, he does not count. He may not
hunt or fish with the others; his presence would bring misfortune; the
spirit of his dead wife would frighten the fish or the game. He is no
longer heard in the discussions. He has no voice in the council of
elders. He may not take part in a dance; he may not own a garden. If
one of his children marries, he has no right to interfere in anything or
receive any present. If he were dead, he could not be ignored more
completely. He has become a nocturnal animal. He is forbidden to
shew himself in public, to traverse the village, to walk in the roads
and paths. Like a boar, he must go in the grass or the bushes. If he
hears or sees any one, especially a woman, coming from afar, he
must hide himself behind a tree or a thicket. If he wishes to go
hunting or fishing by himself, he must go at night. If he has to consult
any one, even the missionary, he does it in great secrecy and by
night. He seems to have lost his voice, and only speaks in a whisper.
He is painted black from head to foot. The hair of his head is shaved,
except two tufts which flutter on his temples. He wears a skull-cap
which covers his head completely to the ears; it ends in a point at the
back of his neck. Round his waist he wears one, two, or three
sashes of plaited grass; his arms and legs from the knees to the
ankles are covered with armlets and leglets of the same sort; and
round his neck he wears a similar ornament. His diet is strictly
regulated, but he does not observe it more than he can help, eating
in secret whatever is given him or he can lay his hands on. “His