Because it's "unnatural", much like homosexuality, interracial marriage, women in the work place, and women's reproductive rights.
I think it's explained best above how it's basically a relic of Christian influence on society.
.. Wait, not all Christians think like that. I'm a Christian myself but look at how I see necromancy lol. Also, I would like to say that it's not some Christians alone, men who like being superior think less of women even if they're not religious overall. Just pointing that out.
Caramel Frappe: Question: This is going to sound pretty weird, but... I am very interested if not taken in by necromancy. I'm not just talking about video games (though I really have a blast being one in Skyrim), but I've also looked up necromancy and read up on it. However, a lot of sources summarize necromancy as an evil element, a forbidden power no one should withhold (whether you believe in myths or not).
Why is it seen as evil? Can't necromancy possibly be used for good? In most TV shows, games, and books/novels, anything relating to necromancy has a villain behind it. I don't admire that concept, because it's like saying fire is an evil element because it burns everything it touches. Fire can be used to warm places, cook food, inspire art (like tattoos, ect.) and so forth. So why does necromancy gets no love from anyone unless it's from an evil person or monster (if you're including fiction)?
Science Related Question: Just thought of something... scientists try to create animals from mere samples. Since they're trying to bring back mammoths even to this day, can that be seen as necromancy? Also scientists cloning from an animal that was already dead.. like a dog or sheep- can that be necromancy too? Sure it's not magical powers or anything but the definition behind necromancy is bringing back the dead (despite that it's done differently in this case).
Note: Even if you disagree with me, I would still love to hear your answers. Also note I am not into preforming necromancy, just the ideal makes me curious and enlightened if that makes sense.
It's evil because by rezzing the dead you are disturbing their eternal rest, not to mention bending them to your will.
Also, when you clone an animal you aren't bringing it back from the dead, you are creating a new animal with the same dna, big difference.
I'd argue it is because the fantasy genre is largely uncreative genre when it comes to world building. Fantasy writers tend to rely on a lot of tropes, so unless they are specifically trying to break a trope (like necromancers are creepy, evil guys) they are likely to fall into it naturally. But I think that doesn't get to the question you are actually asking. I think the large issue that the OP doesn't get around is that necromancy is rarely a benevolent action or one of resurrection. It is animating corpses to use as slaves, not to bring back a tragically killed father or whatever. It is about using dead bodies for personal gain usually, so not really a lot there people are glad to see happening. Still, that doesn't mean that there can never be a good necromancer, it is just the stock necromancers are evil.
Because it's "unnatural", much like homosexuality, interracial marriage, women in the work place, and women's reproductive rights.
I think it's explained best above how it's basically a relic of Christian influence on society.
.. Wait, not all Christians think like that. I'm a Christian myself but look at how I see necromancy lol. Also, I would like to say that it's not some Christians alone, men who like being superior think less of women even if they're not religious overall. Just pointing that out.
"I think it's explained best above how it's basically a relic of Christian influence on society."
It would be interesting to see a fantasy setting where theres a village or city that willingly gives their dead over to a benevolent necromancer. You could see it from the point of view that as long as the necromancer doesnt do anything to the departeds soul and only uses the bodies with consent that theres nothing really wrong. It would be an interesting setting.
That reminds me of Richard's village in Looking for Group, and also reminds me that there should be enough pages since I last read it for me to have a decent amount of story to look at.
It's been sort of meh and slow lately. I don't know how much you've missed, though - it has had some interesting stuff happen.
Anyway, you reminded me of Might and Magic. Normally, if you don't have a high enough cleric in your group (for example, they are dead), you need to go to the nearest village and visit the doctor to heal and resurrect your dead comrades. Now, things get interesting if you go to an evil village. They are perfectly happy to heal you and, if need be, just raise your characters as zombies. Well they can move and they can fight, what more do you need?
It's pretty hilarious the first time it happens.
And now you've reminded me of Erfworld, which is pretty much HoMM: the non-copyright infringing webcomic. Plus HoMM, which I have the first three entries of but haven't played in ages.
It's evil because people dont like the idea of people messing around with their bodies, probably some bible stuff about respecting dead bodies, and cloning isnt technically necromancy because your not bringing Mammoth bodies back as mindless slaves, but making new ones
Caramel Frappe: Question: This is going to sound pretty weird, but... I am very interested if not taken in by necromancy. I'm not just talking about video games (though I really have a blast being one in Skyrim), but I've also looked up necromancy and read up on it. However, a lot of sources summarize necromancy as an evil element, a forbidden power no one should withhold (whether you believe in myths or not).
Generally speaking, it's just about balance and natural order. Necromancy subverts Death, which is one of the cornerstones of maintaining the natural order of things. Since in most mythologies magic comes from Nature, using magic to go against Nature is a corruption, and will lead to big problems.
Ah yes, normally, necromancy does go against nature. But there is a minor trope in which they tend to the natural order. Not popular a lot but it's out there. Examples: - the many mentions of the D2 necromancer. He's a reskinned druid, so to say. Although a bit more morbid in looks and act. - at least part of the necromancers in the newest Might and Magic universe. They are following that spider queen thingie and tend to the natural order of life and death. - the Euthanatos from Mage the Ascension. You can say the necros from M&M are very close to them. The Euthanatos tend to the natural balance of fate. Karma, luck, death as both an ending and a beginning - they look after it. Not strictly necromancers, but are known as death mages. - the Guardian of Death in the Legacy of Kain world. One of the Circle of the Nine. It's a person given powers over life and death to preserve the balance between them and protect the world. Mortanius is plainly the nicest guy from the whole Circle. And that's saying a lot, really.
Of course, these guardians of the order aren't portrayed as knights in shining armour. They are rather morbid and maybe downright creepy but all in all act more as anti-heroes than villains.
HardkorSB: Because Christianity has been present in our society for a long time and according to it, all magic is the work of the devil. Only god can give and take a life, a human shouldn't do it. Also, since soul is powering a body, resurrecting the dead means either stealing a soul from god or creating a soulless living being.
But really, dead people are gross and they smell bad and they're decomposing so making them alive is icky.
This isn't actually true, regarding Christianity at least. There are christian mystics who practice various forms of magic even today.
LetalisK: Because it's "unnatural", much like homosexuality, interracial marriage, women in the work place, and women's reproductive rights.
I think it's explained best above how it's basically a relic of Christian influence on society.
.. Wait, not all Christians think like that. I'm a Christian myself but look at how I see necromancy lol. Also, I would like to say that it's not some Christians alone, men who like being superior think less of women even if they're not religious overall. Just pointing that out.
"I think it's explained best above how it's basically a relic of Christian influence on society."
I was not accusing you of anything.
Which form of Christianity? Are you saying it's the influence of Christianity alone? Where in the bible does it talk negatively about women's reproductive rights? Where in the bible does it talk negatively about interracial marriage? Do you know that using the term relic implies that there are no longer Christians in society?
I think your confusing religious beliefs with general cultural beliefs.
Its just how its defined in certain fantasy worlds. There are a few examples of it being seen as a good thing, or just another aspect of magic in other fantasy settings, but in most it's seen as evil. This is because the act of raising the dead is seen as taboo in most cultures and societies, just like grave robbing is considered a disgusting dishonourable act. Disturbing the dead in any form is very much a no no act.
Worlds in which necromancy is considered just another type of magic, neutral or good, are generally rather boring. The exception being planescape because it has lots of other "evils" that are much worse.
Jack the Potato: The dead deserve their dignity. It's not a matter of religion or belief in the afterlife either; we also should respect the memories of the dead. Just because someone is dead gives us free reign to fuck around with their bodies as we please? No. It's about basic human respect, is all.
Why? They are dead, inanimate, useless, waste of space and resources, why do non-living things deserve dignity because they were once living? They aren't a human anymore, so who cares what happens to them?
Caramel Frappe: Question: This is going to sound pretty weird, but... I am very interested if not taken in by necromancy. I'm not just talking about video games (though I really have a blast being one in Skyrim), but I've also looked up necromancy and read up on it. However, a lot of sources summarize necromancy as an evil element, a forbidden power no one should withhold (whether you believe in myths or not).
Why is it seen as evil? Can't necromancy possibly be used for good? In most TV shows, games, and books/novels, anything relating to necromancy has a villain behind it. I don't admire that concept, because it's like saying fire is an evil element because it burns everything it touches. Fire can be used to warm places, cook food, inspire art (like tattoos, ect.) and so forth. So why does necromancy gets no love from anyone unless it's from an evil person or monster (if you're including fiction)?
Science Related Question: Just thought of something... scientists try to create animals from mere samples. Since they're trying to bring back mammoths even to this day, can that be seen as necromancy? Also scientists cloning from an animal that was already dead.. like a dog or sheep- can that be necromancy too? Sure it's not magical powers or anything but the definition behind necromancy is bringing back the dead (despite that it's done differently in this case).
Note: Even if you disagree with me, I would still love to hear your answers. Also note I am not into preforming necromancy, just the ideal makes me curious and enlightened if that makes sense.
I would say it's evil, because slavery is evil, and through necromancy your basically creating slaves of the dead and of other spiritual beings. A necromancer is basically a slaver; now ask yourself, do you like slavers or agree with slavery? Also life is hard, because of this the dead deserve the rest that they have earned by making there way through life, and this rest shouldn't be disturbed.
edit: also, because of reasons above necromancers are some of my favorite people to kill in rpgs.
Klumpfot: Necromancy always seemed incredibly inefficient to me. If what you want is an army, mind control is where it's at. Living people have functional muscle tissue and such, which tend to be helpful for conquering.
As for the morality involved, surely that would depend on the setting? If some warlock forces your conscience back into your corpse (disregarding where it went after your death) you would presumably feel your nerves disintegrating and such. Sounds painful. That person would probably qualify as evil.
Even the cheapest minions have to be paid. Reanimated corpses need no health benefits, no dental care (even though both are in a poor shape), no food, no payment. They also: Don't complain, every enemy killed can be turned into a loyal minion causing disruption when used against someone who knew the person before he or she died. They provide psychological and emotional warfare along with actual numbers and strength. That makes up for their flaws any day.
Though your comment on necromancy being kinda evil. Well, I think what I just said qualifies in the category very evil so not disagreeing there.
I feel like the negative perception of necromancy stems from the christian belief that only God should have control over life and death (medicine being the only exception, obviously). Despite the growing popularity of secular values, christianity is deeply ingrained into western culture. The influence from Judeo-Christian values could have easily influenced fantasy writing.
Also, I don't think cloning a dead animal is really necromancy, since the original body is not reanimated. The closest thing we have to necromancy is CPR.
I think it has more to do with the fact that necromancers subvert the natural order of the world. How often do you see in these fantasy settings that the souls the necromancer brings back from the other side are happy, or even sane?
As for your examples, necromancy has a lot to do with bringing back or using the souls of the dead to animate the necromancers creations. What science is doing with cloning and such is using the template for a creatures body in order to create a whole new one. It just looks the exact same. To sum up, I think it's the use of souls that defines a necromancer, not just the use of corpses.
That being said, there is a series of books whose names escape me, and I don't have them nearby, but the royal family in that setting has the power to see the spirits of the dead and allow them to be seen by others. It is, in a sense, a kind of necromancy though I don't think he can bring them back after they move on.
If we look at the core of necromancy as an idea, it's pretty much "bob is dead, we will bring him back to life*", or what is otherwise called reanimation. That in and of itself isn't necessarily "evil" (I'm a nihilist, but I'll use the term for your convenience). However, it opens the door to things that could be seen as vile, sadistic and/or evil.
What I think is most important to note is the concept of a soul in many fantasy tales. When performing necromancy, it is uncommon that they succeed to bring someone back without a hitch. Often their soul has to be bound to a body that is rotten or otherwise damaged which could be more miserable for the person involved than staying dead. Other than that there's plenty of examples where the soul itself has been destroyed, preventing it from reaching a peaceful rest or whatever place or that that the universe's true religion specifies.
tl;dr: the concept itself isn't evil, but it can cause grim things. Removing the tools is a great (if sometimes wrong) way to prevent the action.
*as close to living as possible. I don't view zombies as living creatures, but they're a part of necromancy. Reanimating something
(I'm viewing the argument from a fantasy perspective, because the notion of necromancy in real life is a tad ridiculous)
HardkorSB: Because Christianity has been present in our society for a long time and according to it, all magic is the work of the devil. Only god can give and take a life, a human shouldn't do it. Also, since soul is powering a body, resurrecting the dead means either stealing a soul from god or creating a soulless living being.
But really, dead people are gross and they smell bad and they're decomposing so making them alive is icky.
This isn't actually true, regarding Christianity at least. There are christian mystics who practice various forms of magic even today.
Exorcisms are technically magic as well but that's good old Christian magic so it's ok.
Necromancy could be used for good, I don't see why not. But then again, popular opinion of anything that's dead coming back is that it's evil. Zombies, ghosts, spirits, etc. So it's just generalizing.
Caramel Frappe: Huh, that does make sense. But if that's the case, then can certain sciences be considered the same in defiling Nature? Because in my OP, I brought up about cloning and though I have gotten responses that cloning and necromancy isn't the same- I see the process being somewhat identical. You're bringing something to life from dead tissue, or DNA basically (can be live tissue but I am looking at the mammoths project where they're trying to bring a dead species back to life). How would you see that? Do you agree or disagree? (just curious since you always make excellent points).
Cloning isn't reviving dead tissue, though. You're using the blueprint to create a copy, but the new tissue is living. And it's separate from the original.
With necromancy, it's usually one or the other, but not both. You either reanimate dead tissue, but it's still basically dead (just moving), or you bring the actual person/etc. back from the dead.
That said, a lot of folks do feel that cloning is an aberration to nature. It usually stems from a discussion of the existence and nature of the "soul." (Either cloning is duplicating a soul, or it's create a vessel without one.)
DoPo: Of course, these guardians of the order aren't portrayed as knights in shining armour. They are rather morbid and maybe downright creepy but all in all act more as anti-heroes than villains.
I blame the severe glut of "anti-heroes" a few years back. A bunch of "guilty pleasure" characters created out of more concern over making characters cool than making them interesting.
(Don't get me wrong, there are good anti-heroes. Just not most of them.)
Caramel Frappe: Question: This is going to sound pretty weird, but... I am very interested if not taken in by necromancy. I'm not just talking about video games (though I really have a blast being one in Skyrim), but I've also looked up necromancy and read up on it. However, a lot of sources summarize necromancy as an evil element, a forbidden power no one should withhold (whether you believe in myths or not).
Why is it seen as evil? Can't necromancy possibly be used for good? In most TV shows, games, and books/novels, anything relating to necromancy has a villain behind it. I don't admire that concept, because it's like saying fire is an evil element because it burns everything it touches. Fire can be used to warm places, cook food, inspire art (like tattoos, ect.) and so forth. So why does necromancy gets no love from anyone unless it's from an evil person or monster (if you're including fiction)?
Science Related Question: Just thought of something... scientists try to create animals from mere samples. Since they're trying to bring back mammoths even to this day, can that be seen as necromancy? Also scientists cloning from an animal that was already dead.. like a dog or sheep- can that be necromancy too? Sure it's not magical powers or anything but the definition behind necromancy is bringing back the dead (despite that it's done differently in this case).
Note: Even if you disagree with me, I would still love to hear your answers. Also note I am not into preforming necromancy, just the ideal makes me curious and enlightened if that makes sense.
Never thought I'd run into a thread like this.
Necromancy is seen as defiling the 'natural cycle', the whole souls thing is very misleading as most common undead (skeletons and zombies) have no soul. They are automatons constructed of flesh that only obey.
Because this school of magic 'messes' with things, it is deemed as evil and perverse because the practitioners want to inspire fear and gain power that way.
But... I am in a D&D 3.5e campaign at the moment playing a Dread Necromancer (Heroes of Horror Sypplement) who does NOT raise the dead. He is Lawful Neutral, trying to show the world that Necromancy can be used for good things too.
In most settings, it's because in order to create undead to enslave the soul of the person and shove it into their corpse. In D&D, primarily 3.5, it's because that's how it was in previous editions. Which I always found odd, because with the Plane of Negative Energy and naturally occurring points in the material Realm with energy flowing in from planes, you can't even make the argument that they're unnatural, because they can occur naturally in the setting. And for desecrating the dead, what party doesn't loot the bodies of their enemies anyway? And how many even give them a burial? And then there's the whole "mindless creatures are always neutral and not evil" and then "mindless undead are always evil" thing. So yeah, in D&D it's a hold-over from previous editions where it involved enslaving souls.
TL;DR - is it evil? It's mostly depicted this way but not exclusively. Can it be used for good? Yes, it can. Depending on the setting/presentation. Is cloning necromancy? No, it's not.
Your TL:DR doesnt really reperesent your post that well. While it was a wall of text, its was a damn good wall of text. Hell... I was going to say something about this, and now I feel its just not necessary now...
Caramel Frappe: Question: This is going to sound pretty weird, but... I am very interested if not taken in by necromancy. I'm not just talking about video games (though I really have a blast being one in Skyrim), but I've also looked up necromancy and read up on it. However, a lot of sources summarize necromancy as an evil element, a forbidden power no one should withhold (whether you believe in myths or not).
Why is it seen as evil? Can't necromancy possibly be used for good? In most TV shows, games, and books/novels, anything relating to necromancy has a villain behind it. I don't admire that concept, because it's like saying fire is an evil element because it burns everything it touches. Fire can be used to warm places, cook food, inspire art (like tattoos, ect.) and so forth. So why does necromancy gets no love from anyone unless it's from an evil person or monster (if you're including fiction)?
Science Related Question: Just thought of something... scientists try to create animals from mere samples. Since they're trying to bring back mammoths even to this day, can that be seen as necromancy? Also scientists cloning from an animal that was already dead.. like a dog or sheep- can that be necromancy too? Sure it's not magical powers or anything but the definition behind necromancy is bringing back the dead (despite that it's done differently in this case).
Note: Even if you disagree with me, I would still love to hear your answers. Also note I am not into preforming necromancy, just the ideal makes me curious and enlightened if that makes sense.
I would say it's evil, because slavery is evil, and through necromancy your basically creating slaves of the dead and of other spiritual beings. A necromancer is basically a slaver; now ask yourself, do you like slavers or agree with slavery? Also life is hard, because of this the dead deserve the rest that they have earned by making there way through life, and this rest shouldn't be disturbed.
edit: also, because of reasons above necromancers are some of my favorite people to kill in rpgs.
Depends, if the undead being controlled don't have a soul in them and are more just husks running on magic, then they aren't so much as slaves than machines.
OT: Necromancy is grey, It can be used for good or it can be used for bad. Always wanted to see what a necromancer would be like if he wasn't portrayed in a way as a ruler of undead but rather a comrade, he would summon a soul willing to be summoned into the corpse of a foe and continue as two separate entities with different wills.
Caramel Frappe: Question: This is going to sound pretty weird, but... I am very interested if not taken in by necromancy. I'm not just talking about video games (though I really have a blast being one in Skyrim), but I've also looked up necromancy and read up on it. However, a lot of sources summarize necromancy as an evil element, a forbidden power no one should withhold (whether you believe in myths or not).
Why is it seen as evil? Can't necromancy possibly be used for good? In most TV shows, games, and books/novels, anything relating to necromancy has a villain behind it. I don't admire that concept, because it's like saying fire is an evil element because it burns everything it touches. Fire can be used to warm places, cook food, inspire art (like tattoos, ect.) and so forth. So why does necromancy gets no love from anyone unless it's from an evil person or monster (if you're including fiction)?
Science Related Question: Just thought of something... scientists try to create animals from mere samples. Since they're trying to bring back mammoths even to this day, can that be seen as necromancy? Also scientists cloning from an animal that was already dead.. like a dog or sheep- can that be necromancy too? Sure it's not magical powers or anything but the definition behind necromancy is bringing back the dead (despite that it's done differently in this case).
Note: Even if you disagree with me, I would still love to hear your answers. Also note I am not into preforming necromancy, just the ideal makes me curious and enlightened if that makes sense.
I would say it's evil, because slavery is evil, and through necromancy your basically creating slaves of the dead and of other spiritual beings. A necromancer is basically a slaver; now ask yourself, do you like slavers or agree with slavery? Also life is hard, because of this the dead deserve the rest that they have earned by making there way through life, and this rest shouldn't be disturbed.
edit: also, because of reasons above necromancers are some of my favorite people to kill in rpgs.
Depends, if the undead being controlled don't have a soul in them and are more just husks running on magic, then they aren't so much as slaves than machines.
If that's the case then why not simply use machines rather than desecrating a grave site, and disturbing at the very least a human body? You could even use human-size wooden dolls, as long as they have all the joints necessary for movement it would be the same thing, plus the dolls wouldn't rot. No, in the end there has to be a reason to use a corpse rather than utilizing the ways I have described above or something similar, and that reason is souls.
Because necromancers are almost invariably serial killer psycho every-bad-thing-that-people-can-be-in-one-package fucktards. The few exceptions are generally acceptable and maybe even likeable fellows/fellowettes.
I would say it's evil, because slavery is evil, and through necromancy your basically creating slaves of the dead and of other spiritual beings. A necromancer is basically a slaver; now ask yourself, do you like slavers or agree with slavery? Also life is hard, because of this the dead deserve the rest that they have earned by making there way through life, and this rest shouldn't be disturbed.
edit: also, because of reasons above necromancers are some of my favorite people to kill in rpgs.
Depends, if the undead being controlled don't have a soul in them and are more just husks running on magic, then they aren't so much as slaves than machines.
If that's the case then why not simply use machines rather than desecrating a grave site, and disturbing at the very least a human body? You could even use human-size wooden dolls, as long as they have all the joints necessary for movement it would be the same thing, plus the dolls wouldn't rot. No, in the end there has to be a reason to use a corpse rather than utilizing the ways I have described above or something similar, and that reason is souls.
Uhm no, I can think of 2 very good reasons you'd use a body rather than machines.
1) The technological advancement in most fantasy settings (where necromancy is prevalent) is minimal, leaving magic to pick up where science and engineering is lacking.
2) Even with all our technological advances we have now, we don't even come close to replicating the dexterity of the human muscle structure, How would a wooden doll be more capable than what even our most complicated polymers can't do.
Caramel Frappe: Question: This is going to sound pretty weird, but... I am very interested if not taken in by necromancy. I'm not just talking about video games (though I really have a blast being one in Skyrim), but I've also looked up necromancy and read up on it. However, a lot of sources summarize necromancy as an evil element, a forbidden power no one should withhold (whether you believe in myths or not).
Why is it seen as evil? Can't necromancy possibly be used for good? In most TV shows, games, and books/novels, anything relating to necromancy has a villain behind it. I don't admire that concept, because it's like saying fire is an evil element because it burns everything it touches. Fire can be used to warm places, cook food, inspire art (like tattoos, ect.) and so forth. So why does necromancy gets no love from anyone unless it's from an evil person or monster (if you're including fiction)?
Science Related Question: Just thought of something... scientists try to create animals from mere samples. Since they're trying to bring back mammoths even to this day, can that be seen as necromancy? Also scientists cloning from an animal that was already dead.. like a dog or sheep- can that be necromancy too? Sure it's not magical powers or anything but the definition behind necromancy is bringing back the dead (despite that it's done differently in this case).
Note: Even if you disagree with me, I would still love to hear your answers. Also note I am not into preforming necromancy, just the ideal makes me curious and enlightened if that makes sense.
Cloning is not re-animation. Cloning is essentially creating a twin.
Fieldy409: It would be interesting to see a fantasy setting where theres a village or city that willingly gives their dead over to a benevolent necromancer. You could see it from the point of view that as long as the necromancer doesnt do anything to the departeds soul and only uses the bodies with consent that theres nothing really wrong. It would be an interesting setting.
Then the people could get an army of zombies to protect them! Or zombie labour!
Look at Hollowfaust: City of Necromancers its from the Scarred Lands D20 Campaign Setting. Its an entire city ruled by benevolent necromancers and all everyone who dies in the city is raised for labor and protection for the city.
If that's the case then why not simply use machines rather than desecrating a grave site, and disturbing at the very least a human body? You could even use human-size wooden dolls, as long as they have all the joints necessary for movement it would be the same thing, plus the dolls wouldn't rot. No, in the end there has to be a reason to use a corpse rather than utilizing the ways I have described above or something similar, and that reason is souls.
(sake this is such a nerdy debate, but) Like tobi said, you can't really replicate the movement of fleshy bodies with any sort of current technology let alone in most rpg medieval settings. The term "soul" is quite ambiguous really but I understand what you mean - I always figured Necromancy never involved any part of the deceased's life other than the physical, with animation provided purely by the magic that a necromancer supplied. Using the only example I know of, that's what separated Necromancers and Ritualists in guild wars, in that Ritualists used the spirits of the departed and Necromancers only used the remains left behind them.
Depends, if the undead being controlled don't have a soul in them and are more just husks running on magic, then they aren't so much as slaves than machines.
If that's the case then why not simply use machines rather than desecrating a grave site, and disturbing at the very least a human body? You could even use human-size wooden dolls, as long as they have all the joints necessary for movement it would be the same thing, plus the dolls wouldn't rot. No, in the end there has to be a reason to use a corpse rather than utilizing the ways I have described above or something similar, and that reason is souls.
Uhm no, I can think of 2 very good reasons you'd use a body rather than machines.
1) The technological advancement in most fantasy settings (where necromancy is prevalent) is minimal, leaving magic to pick up where science and engineering is lacking.
2) Even with all our technological advances we have now, we don't even come close to replicating the dexterity of the human muscle structure, How would a wooden doll be more capable than what even our most complicated polymers can't do.
1. You don't need advanced technology or engineering for what I am talking about.
2. In terms of dexterity a wooden dummy with ball joints would have more dexterity than a human being. Remember, where not talking about tec were talking about magic, the magic makes the body move, so all it needs is correct proportions and joints.
3. I have a bachelors degree in folklore with an emphasis in supernatural folklore(and a bachelors in fine art, but that's beside the point), and I'm pretty sure you would be unable to find any folk/magic beliefs regarding necromancy that did not involve the enslavement of a human soul or other spiritual being.
.. Wait, not all Christians think like that. I'm a Christian myself but look at how I see necromancy lol. Also, I would like to say that it's not some Christians alone, men who like being superior think less of women even if they're not religious overall. Just pointing that out.