In 1843, when the parish church of Minchinhampton was rebuilding, the soil of the burial-ground, or what was superfluous, was disposed of for manure, and deposited in many of the neighbouring gardens. The result was that the town was nearly decimated. I have lately made personal inquiries upon the spot, and find that the mischief which resulted has been even understated. The outbreak of the plague in Egypt in 1823 has also been traced to the opening of a disused burial-ground at Kelioub, fourteen miles from Cairo. Two thousand perished in the village, and Cairo suffered fearful mortality. The outbreak of plague from this cause is also vouched for by M. Pariset, who was sent to Egypt by the French Government to inquire into the cause of the plague. Even the exhalations of a single corpse buried twelve years have been known to engender a dangerous disease in a whole convent.14
I think it may be accepted as proven that the burning of the dead was of purely sanitary origin, and that it is erroneous to consider it a religious one. It became identified with heathen worship, because then everything was heathen. In Italy, the Abbé Bucellati, of Pavia, deprecates the idea that cremation can in any way be considered heretical; at the most, says he, it can only be called a rash project. The Rev. Mr. Long, of Zurich, for his part, insists that religion has no title to mix itself up with the question. The subject is essentially one of health, and will so remain. We may almost say that so prominently did the practice bring forth the idea of purification in the minds of its original observers, that several semi-religious mystifications were born of it. Thus the body was supposed by some to be unclean after the soul had left it, and that fire alone could purify it. Others held that by burning the body the soul was finally loosed from the clay, and cleansed from the contaminations which it contracted in the flesh.
In order to arrive at a correct idea of all the modes of sepulture followed out in this country since the islands were first populated, it would be necessary to consult almost an endless variety of archæological, ethnological, and anthropological works. Professor Rolleston has, however, lately reprinted a paper of his, upon the methods of 'Sepulture observable in late Romano-British and early Anglo-Saxon times, in this country,' and it deals with as much of the question as answers the present purpose. He shows that burning of the dead was not resorted to by the early Christians of England, and he quotes Mr. Kemble to the effect that all Anglo-Saxon burials without cremation in England are Christian. This says nothing for or against the desirability of the reintroduction of cremation amongst us. The question, however, is a curious and interesting one, and all would doubtless wish to know whether or not the examples of cremation already recorded from fifteen counties in England are all heathen. When some of the graves were opened they were found to contain fragments of charcoal, but that again must not be necessarily taken as an evidence of cremation. It was but the other day that a wooden bowl full of charcoal was found in the tomb of Leonardo da Vinci. In the middle ages it was common to place a vessel full of ashes on the pillow of a dying Christian and to bury it with him; and the practices would seem identical. The reason for finding 'shards, flints, and pebbles' in the later and possibly Christian graves has also led to some curious discussion. It is inferred that it was probably allowed in earlier Christian times, and only discarded about the time of Shakespeare.15 The whole controversy must be left in the hands of those who, like Professor Rolleston, are prosecuting researches into the early methods of burial, and who have opportunities and attainments for coming to a right and final conclusion.
It would be supremely foolish to object to the burning of the dead on the score of its being completely a heathen practice, and as if burial in the ground was not at one time open to the same objection. Not only so, but the battle between torch and spade was fought out in early times as now.
A writer of the second century admits that many of the Gentiles disapproved of cremation on the score of the cruelty which it did to the body, which did not deserve such penal treatment.16 This is exactly what some are declaring now. An exclamation is even to be found in an old Greek poet asking Prometheus to take back the fire which he had procured them.17 Just as now a few Christians are contesting the propriety of burning the dead upon any consideration whatever, so the heathens were disputing the like question before the advent of Christianity. Heraclitus advocated burning – Thales and Hippon burial. Up to this day the Persian fire-worshippers will have naught to do with cremation because they regard it as a profanation of their deity. Nay, peoples are still disputing in countries which are painted in pagan black upon our missionary maps, and where Christians as yet have no footing. In Japan, the Shinto sect practises burial, the Monto sect cremation.18 In Madras Presidency the votaries of Vishnu are burned, and those of Siva are buried in the common way. Amongst the hill tribes of North Aracan one tribe buries its dead in graves dug in the villages, the adjacent one burns its dead after the fashion of the neighbouring Burmese.19 And to quote one more example, some tribes of the Miau-Tsi – who are all of them zealous Buddhists – burn their dead, whilst others do not.20
People are every now and then solemnly informed that it is unadvisable to practise cremation because it is supposed to militate against a belief in the resurrection.21
But the ancient Romans, as has been explained by his Grace the Bishop of Manchester, believed in the immortality of the soul, which is a collateral idea, and they practised the burning of the dead. They did not believe in the resurrection of their present bodies, it is true, neither do many now.22 The truth, on examination, however, appears to be that the early Christians objected to it because it was practised by the pagans, and because it was necessary to draw a strong barrier line between the two faiths. The ostensible objection which they found to burning was that their bodies had been redeemed and renewed in God's image. They taught that it was unlawful to burn the dead, because the penalty of fire had been remitted. The body was to be buried, and was thus held to be in readiness for the last trump. They did not believe that it was impossible to raise up the martyrs which were even then burnt, but they were not to burn. The breach between the two faiths was not at first an utter one, however. The Christians interred in the same places as the heathens, and even painted and engraved upon the catacombs representations of the heathen gods and goddesses.23 The breach, however, widened, and then came the more Christian emblems of wreaths of flowers, angels, and children. Later on in succession came the Good Shepherd, the cross, the crucifixion scene, and so on,24 gradually leading up to the skull and cross-bones of the last century. By this time the Christians heard of burning with horror. But a classical reaction set in about the time of Pope and Dryden, and now again may be seen in every churchyard the broken shaft, the inverted torches, and other emblems. It would also be fairly impossible to count the number of marble urns which 'in pride of place' rest upon the monuments in our cemeteries.
Many other groundless objections have been imported into the cremation question. For instance, some demur to burning because the body of our Saviour was not so treated. Can anything be more puerile than this when once it is examined? Our Saviour's body was not burnt simply because He was a Jew, and the Jews practised burial in sepulchres. He performed several of His greatest miracles owing to this very practice. But if we are to follow the prototype so closely, why do we practise burial in the earth? And why do we not lay our dead in roomy sepulchres? I have perused most, if not all, of the religious objections which have been urged against cremation, and I humbly say that they appear to me to be outside the pale of argument altogether. They rank only as very respectable crotchets, and never rise above mere sentiment. The truth is, that the question of burying the dead or of burning them ought never to have been made, if ever it has seriously been made, a religious question.