Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1884-07-31
eATHS AND THEIR MEANING.
Affirmation Upheld by the History
and Character of Swearing
From the Liverpool Mercury.

From the Liyet pool Mercury
The new volume of the EncycIopG-
diQ Britannica just published con
tains remarkably interesting article
on the subject Of "Oaths," which is
particularly seasonable at the present
moment IN connection with the Brad
laugh discussion, and the information
contained in which, from historical
point of view, ought to strengthen the
position of Mr.. Gladstone and the
Liberal party in their desire to carry
an Affirmation bill. The author, Dr.
L. B. Tylor, makes it abundantly evi-
dent that the oath originally had no
connection whatever with sacred
matters 1t is simply a relic of bar
barism, IAN asseveration or promise
made under non-human penalty or
sanction. The idea of its having
been at the first an appeal to the Dl
vine Being is quite a mistake. The
invocation Of the Deity to punish was
learned by the savage tribes from
their civilized neighbors. An exam
ple of TIE curse oath II seen among
the Nagas of Assam, where two men
lay hold Of dog or fowl by head or
feet. the animal being then chopped
in two by single blow as emblemahc
of the fate which is expected to befall
the rerjurer. Sometimes the person
taking the oath would hold in his
hand a spear head or a tigers tooth,
by which act he virtually said IF l
do not faithfully perform this my
promise. may fall by these An
other stage in the history Of the oaths
was reached when the swearer called
on some fierce beast to punish him if
he lied. believing that somehow it
knew what he said, and had power TO
Interfere in human affairs. Between
the Russians and the Wild Ostyaks Of
Siberia, for example, the head of a
bear was brought into court, and the
Ostyak, making a gesture to initiate
eating, called upon the bear to devour
him If he did not speak the truth. In
the earlier stages of natural, or rather
nature religion, natural objects were
invoked, being looked upon as ami
mate and personal, Thus the old Ro
mans swore by the Styx or the Tiber,
the Hindoo by the Gauges, while in
New Guinea oaths are still taken by
an appeal to the sun, the mountains,
or weapons of war. The Romans had
another custom, in the form of killirg
hog by the sacred flint, with the in
vocation to Jupiter so to smite the
people who did not keep their oath.
Dr. Tylor had no hesitation IN saying
that the modern forms of adjuratioH
can all be traced back IN some way or
other to these ba,baric practices,
while he dwells with emphasis upon
the fact that among Christian nations
there has been much difference Of
opinion upon the taking of oachs, st.
Chrysostom and most of the fathers
founding their teachings on the words
of the divine Author OF Christianity
violently denouncing the practice as
a snare of Satan. The Christian
custom of taking the oath upon q copy
Of the gospels seems to have been de
rived from the late Jewish practice,
in which the oath was taken, holding
in the hand the scroll of the law or
the phylacteries, this ceremony itself
being possibly adapted from the Ro-
man custom. The practice of kissing
the book appears first in the Middle
Ages at the time when 1t became Gus
tomaIy to touch the relics of the
saints upon the altar, the cross, or a
Bishops crozier. Such an oath,
where a sacred object was touched,
was called corporal or bodily
oath, as distinguished from a merely
spoken or written oath. The English
word to signify this sacred OBJECT was
'halidome, and this "halidome" is
now for Christians the New Tesla
ment, for Jews the Old Testament,
for Mohammedans the Koran, and for
HindoOs the Nedas DR.. Tylor fur
Their reminds us that judicial oaths in
England were at one time very nu-
merous, but that they have been
greatly reduced by modern legislation
and that the concluding words Of the
oath, SO help me God, have not
for ages had any precise signiticahon.
On the general subject he contends
that there is growing feeling that
only the ignorant and superstitlous
are bound by an oath; that it increases
temptations to perjury, and encour-
ages the inference that man need
not speak the truth unless he IS upon
his oath. The whole article is one Of
much ability and value, and deserves
to be carefully read, especially in con
nection with the present miserable
Bradlaugn conflict, which IS undoubt-
edly one of prejudice rather than
principle, and which ought to have
been settled long ago on the lines laid
down by the Prime Minister in one OF
the noblest speeches he ever made
a permanent contribution to the liter
allure of civil and religious liberty.