Morality is one of the strangest human inventions. It shapes our lives, our politics, our wars, and our daily choices. Yet it rarely serves justice, fairness, or any higher principle (250 Arguments for Atheism, Jan Bryxí 2025). It looks more like a compromise to stop people from killing each other, but even that fails when wars erupt. Birth, class, and geography decide most of a person’s destiny, not morality.
The history of morality is not a story of smooth progress. It is a story of rulers, clerics, thinkers, and sometimes ordinary people who consolidated power or risked their lives to force change. Rulers forced states to absorb new codes only after decades of resistance. And the result is far from perfect: morality today remains fragmented, inconsistent, and sometimes close to moral nihilism.
Bronze Age to Axial Age
The first moral systems looked like survival codes. They were not about justice but about stabilizing tribes and kingdoms. The Code of Hammurabi fixed blood payments for injuries, ranked punishments by class, and allowed slavery as a normal condition. The Torah blended divine order with tribal law, prescribing death for adultery, blasphemy, and disobedience. These were not moral universals. They were survival formulas for small communities.
Kings and priests linked morality with divine command. Temples regulated interest rates, purity rituals, and food prohibitions. Festivals and sacrifices created rhythm and order. But the codes were arbitrary. One king’s decree replaced another’s. The “eye for an eye” principle already showed a key trait: morality was not designed to serve justice in the abstract. It was designed to stop blood feuds from escalating endlessly.
Late Antiquity: Religion and Imperial codes
As empires grew, morality hardened into imperial law. Christian emperors outlawed pagan sacrifices. Bishops gained judicial authority, offering sanctuary for fugitives and adjudicating disputes. Marriage shifted in doctrine from clan arrangement to personal consent, though practice lagged. The church institutionalized charity, but it was selective and often bound to salvation theology.
Morality now served empire and church. Dissent meant heresy. Religious orthodoxy was no longer only spiritual—it was political loyalty. The emperor’s morality became state morality, regardless of popular opinion.
Early Middle Ages
Kings replaced feud with monetary compensation called wergild. Each injury had a fixed price, from broken bones to death. This limited private vengeance but preserved inequality. A noble’s life was worth more than a peasant’s.
The Peace and Truce of God movements, launched by clerics, tried to ban fighting on holy days and protect clergy and peasants. Slavery slowly turned into serfdom, with peasants tied to land but not owned outright. Yet freedom was not the principle—power and piety were.
Trials used ordeals—boiling water, hot irons, drowning tests—as divine judgment. Oaths and sworn witnesses mattered more than evidence. Morality was about rituals of truth, not truth itself.
High Middle Ages: Religion, power, and forced morality
This was the age when morality was systematized and forced on populations. Gratian’s canon law organized church rules into a vast legal system. The Church defined marriage by consent, banned close-kin unions, and monopolized authority over weddings, wills, and sexual morality.
The Fourth Lateran Council demanded annual confession, standardized heresy pursuit, and imposed clerical education. Ordeals were banned, so secular rulers had to adopt new procedures—jury trials in England, inquisitorial courts on the continent.
Money was moralized. Usury was condemned as a sin. The Church promoted the doctrine of just price and set up monti di pietà to lend without interest. Towns regulated prostitution districts, taverns, gambling, and nightly peace. Guilds enforced quality standards and feast days.
Jews faced restrictions—badges, ghettos, occupational limits. Witchcraft was transformed from superstition into heresy, leading to persecution. Torture entered courtrooms as a supposed rational tool of proof.
People resisted. Tithe collectors faced riots. Heretical preachers drew followers. Anticlerical movements challenged clerical power. But in the end, rulers and bishops consolidated the new morality.
Late Middle Ages: Consolidation and backlash
Royal ordinances centralized justice, curbing private vengeance. Sumptuary laws dictated clothing by estate, enforcing class morality. Inquisitions became professional bureaucracies. Pogroms exploded under crisis, while rulers alternated between protecting and exploiting Jewish communities.
Poor relief shifted from voluntary alms to regulated town funds. Hospitals multiplied, but they were also tools of social control. Peasants revolted, demanding customary rights and rejecting clerical privilege. Universities, meanwhile, standardized education, condemned heterodox teaching, and regulated professions like medicine and law.
Morality was not chosen by the people. It was imposed through statutes, courts, and institutions. But at times, uprisings showed that people could pressure rulers to adjust norms, even if only partially.
Early modern break: One person’s code as state code
The Reformation proved again that morality shifted when power aligned. Luther’s rejection of Rome allowed princes to seize church lands and impose their own religious codes. Marriage became civil in Protestant states, divorce possible, and church authority reduced. Calvin reshaped Geneva with strict moral policing and allowed interest under conditions.
Henry VIII created a national church through royal supremacy. Catholic reform, in response, standardized seminaries, catechisms, and marriage registers. Witch hunts peaked, fueled by new legal standards that justified torture and confessions.
Censorship hardened. The Index of Forbidden Books banned heretical texts. Printing presses were licensed or shut down. Morality became nationalized—one ruler’s doctrine became a country’s code.
Richelieu and Raison d’État
Cardinal Richelieu embodied how morality was tied to power, not conscience. He centralized justice, broke noble armies, and suppressed factions; he tolerated Huguenot worship in limited form but destroyed their fortified towns. He subordinated religion to state interest, even allying with Protestant powers against Catholic rivals.
Here morality was openly subordinated to raison d’état—the reason of the state. Richelieu proved morality was not about justice or popular will. It was about order and control.
Seventeenth-century settlements
The Edict of Nantes granted limited tolerance but was revoked later. The Peace of Westphalia codified the principle that princes decided religion while private worship gained some protection. English poor laws made parishes responsible for their poor, punished vagrants, and controlled labor mobility.
Standing police forces appeared in cities to enforce moral order, from curfews to vice restrictions. The state now directly supervised daily life.
Enlightenment legal turn
Enlightenment thinkers began dismantling cruelty. Jurists curtailed torture, demanded corroboration, and wrote clearer penal codes. Punishments shifted from public spectacle to prisons and labor camps.
Blasphemy and heresy lost importance where tolerance gained ground. Economic morality shifted too: interest became legal, corporations grew, and patents were justified as serving the public good. Morality was reframed as utility, not divine command.
Abolition and equality claims
Slavery was attacked and then abolished in stages. Serfdom was dismantled in many regions. Jews and dissenters gained civil equality. The United States enshrined church-state separation. France introduced laïcité, stripping religion from public authority.
These shifts came from revolutions and elite decrees. But here, more than before, popular pressure mattered. Abolitionist campaigns mobilized citizens. Revolutions in America and France drew their legitimacy from the masses. The balance between top-down and bottom-up change became more visible.
Nineteenth and early twentieth century norms
Morality expanded into new areas. Conscription turned killing into national duty, while laws of war codified limits. Labor law restricted child labor, shortened hours, and legalized unions. Marriage reforms gave women more rights and regulated divorce.
Compulsory schooling created civic morality, binding children to national ideals. Press freedom grew, but libel and obscenity laws preserved moral boundaries. Workers’ movements forced governments to concede rights that rulers had long resisted. Here morality shifted because people demanded it.
Twentieth century resets
Human rights charters redefined cruelty, genocide, and equality. Welfare states framed care as a moral obligation of governments, providing pensions, healthcare, and unemployment support. Death penalties were restricted or abolished in many states.
Civil rights movements fought racism, sexism, and class exclusion. Their marches and protests forced governments to legislate equality. Bioethics imposed new principles of consent, research ethics, and medical limits. Each change followed conflict and resistance, often from both below and above.
Contemporary shifts and stalemates
LGBTQ rights advanced from criminality to recognition. Drug policies shifted toward harm reduction in some states but stayed punitive elsewhere. Debates over euthanasia, abortion, and sex work continue.
Digital surveillance and artificial intelligence created new questions: privacy, speech, and algorithmic fairness. Migration and inequality expose the moral limits of citizenship and borders. Morality struggles to keep pace with reality. And in many cases, people’s movements—climate protests, social justice campaigns—push governments to adapt, sometimes unwillingly.
Throughline: Power above, people below
The pattern repeats. People often resist change, but sometimes they demand it. Elites push reforms, sometimes for self-interest, sometimes for vision. States adopt new norms only after decades of conflict. A single leader or council frequently defines morality for millions. Yet grassroots movements—peasants revolting, workers striking, citizens marching—sometimes ignite change from below.
Morality evolves as power compacts, but at times, popular movements force the state to adjust.
Does morality make sense?
At minimum, morality reduces chaos and intra-group killing. But it fails to guarantee justice. Birth lottery, geography, and class override fairness. Wars never stopped.
A perfect morality would demand every action create infinite numbers of infinitely happy individuals. Our system is far from this. It looks arbitrary, inconsistent, and sometimes absurd. It is closer to moral nihilism than to a universal principle.
Yet morality remains indispensable. Without it, no society survives. Its contradictions do not erase its function. They reveal its human origin: it was built not for justice, but for survival and order.
Conclusion
Morality evolved from tribal codes to modern rights through decrees, wars, reforms, and uprisings. Most of the time, elites reshaped norms against resistance. But at critical points, people demanded the change themselves. Peasants, workers, citizens, and minorities pushed boundaries, forcing rulers to adapt.
The gains are real—abolition, equality, welfare—but so are the hypocrisies and failures.
Does morality make sense? Only as a fragile compromise. It is not justice; it is not fairness. And it is not truth. It is survival dressed in lofty words, sometimes imposed from above, sometimes fought for from below. That makes it both necessary and tragically inadequate.
Leave a Reply