Chapter 85

23Kingsley,West African Studies, p. 414.Cf.Sommerville, ‘Ethnogr. Notes in New Georgia,’Jour. Anthr. Inst.xxvi. 394.

24Burton and Drake,Unexplored Syria, i. 275. See also Burckhardt,Arabic Proverbs, p. 44sq.

The duties of sincerity and good faith are also to some extent, and in certain cases principally, founded on prudential considerations. Although, as theMärchentells us, it happens every day in the world that the fraudulent is successful,25there is a widespread notion that, after all, “honesty is the best policy.” “Nothing that is false can be lasting,” says Cicero.26“The liar is short-lived” (that is, soon detected), say the Arabs.27According to a Wolof proverb, “lies, however numerous, will be caught by truth when it rises up.”28The Basutos have a saying that “cunning devours its master.”29It has been remarked that “if there were no such thing as honesty, it would be a good speculation to invent it, as a means of making one’s fortune.”30

25Grimm,Kinder und Hausmärchen, ‘Katze und Maus in Gesellschaft,’ ‘Die drei Spinnerinnen,’ ‘Das tapfere Schneiderlein,’ &c.

26Cicero,De officiis, ii. 12.

27Burckhardt,Arabic Proverbs, p. 119.

28Burton,Wit and Wisdom from West Africa, p. 15.

29Casalis,Basutos, p. 307.

30Quoted by Bentham,Theory of Legislation, p. 64.

Moreover, lying is attended not only with social disadvantages, but with supernatural danger. The West African Fjort have a tale about a fisherman who every day used to catch and smuggle into his house great quantities of fish,but denied to his brother and relatives that he had caught anything. All this time the fetish Sunga was watching, and was grieved to hear him lie thus. The fetish punished him by depriving him of the power of speech, that he might lie no more, and so for the future he could only make his wants known by signs.31In another instance, the Fjort tell us, the earth-spirit turned into a pillar of clay a woman who said that she had no peas for sale, when she had her basket full of them.32The Nandi of the Uganda Protectorate believe that “God punishes lying by striking the untruthful person with lightning.”33The Dyaks of Borneo think that the lightning god is made angry even by the most nonsensical untruth, such as the statement that a man has a cat for his mother or that vermin can dance.34In Aneiteum, of the New Hebrides, the belief prevailed that liars would be punished in the life to come;35according to the Banks Islanders, they were excluded from the true Panoi or Paradise after death.36We have already noticed the emphasis which some of the higher religions lay on veracity and good faith, and other statements maybe added testifying the interest which gods of a more civilised type take in the fulfilment of these duties. In ancient Egypt Amon Ra, “the chief of all the gods,” was invoked as “Lord of Truth”;37and Maā, or Maat, represented as his daughter, was the goddess of truth and righteousness.38In a Babylonian hymn the moon god is appealed to as the guardian of truth.39The Vedic gods are described as “true” and “not deceitful,” as friends of honesty and righteousness;40and Agni was the lord of vows.41TheZoroastrian Mithra was a protector of truth, fidelity, and covenants;42and Rashnu Razista, “the truest true,” was the genius of truth.43According to the Iliad, Zeus is “no abettor of falsehoods”;44according to Plato, a lie is hateful not only to men but to gods.45Among the Romans Jupiter and Dius Fidius were gods of treaties,46and Fides was worshipped as the deity of faithfulness.47How shall we explain this connection between religious beliefs and the duties of veracity and fidelity to promises?

31Dennett,Folklore of the Fjort, p. 88sq.

32Ibid.p. 5.

33Johnston,Uganda Protectorate, ii. 879.

34Selenka,Sonnige Welten, p. 47.

35Turner,Samoa, p. 326.

36Codrington,Melanesians, p. 274.

37Wiedemann,Religion of the Ancient Egyptians, p. 112.Cf.Brugsch,Die Aegyptologie, pp. 49, 91, 92, 97; Amélineau,Essai sur l’évolution des idées morales dans l’Égypte Ancienne, pp. 182, 188, 251.

38Wiedemann, ‘Maā, déesse de la vérité,’ inAnnales du Musée Guimet, x. 561sqq.Amélineau,op. cit.p. 187.Infra,p. 699.

39Mürdter-Delitzsch,Geschichte Babyloniens und Assyriens, p. 37.

40Bergaigne,La religion védique, iii. 199. Macdonell,Vedic Mythology, p. 18.

41Satapatha-Brâhmana, iii. 2. 2. 24.

42Darmesteter,Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 78. Geiger,Civilization of the Eastern Irānians, pp. lvii., 164. Spiegel,Erânische Alterthumskunde, iii. 685.

43Darmesteter, inSacred Books of the East, xxiii. 168.

44Iliad, iv. 235.

45Plato,Respublica, ii. 382.

46Fowler,Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic, pp. 141, 229sq.

47Cicero,De officiis, iii. 29.Idem,De natura deorum, ii. 23; iii. 18.Idem,De legibus, ii. 8, 11. Dionysius of Halicarnassus,Antiquitates Romanæ, ii. 75.

Apart from the circumstances which in some cases make gods vindicators of the moral law in general, as conceived of by their worshippers, there are quite special reasons for their disapproval of insincerity and bad faith. Here again we notice the influence of magic beliefs on the religious sanction of morality.

There is something uncanny in the untrue word itself. As Professor Stanley Hall points out, children not in frequently regard every deviation from the most painfully literal truth as alike heinous, with no perspective or degrees of difference between the most barefaced intended and unintended lies. In some children this fear of telling an untruth becomes so neurotic that to every statement, even to yes or no, a “perhaps” or “I think” is added mentally, whispered, or aloud. One boy had a long period of fear that, like Ananias and Sapphira, he might some moment drop down dead for a chance and perhaps unconscious lie.48On the other hand, an acted lie is felt to be much less harmful than a spoken one; to point the wrong way when asked where some one is gone is less objectionable than to speak wrongly, to nod is less sinful than to say yes. Indeed, acted lies are for the mostpart easily gotten away with, whereas some mysterious baneful energy seems to be attributed to the spoken untruth. That its evil influence is looked upon as quite mechanical appears from the palliatives used for it. Many American children are of opinion that a lie may be reversed by putting the left hand on the right shoulder and that even an oath may be neutralised or taken in an opposite sense by raising the left instead of the right hand.49Among children in New York “it was sufficient to cross the fingers, elbows, or legs, though the act might not be noticed by the companion accosted, and under such circumstances no blame attached to a falsehood.”50To think “I do not mean it,” or to attach to a statement a meaning quite different from the current one, is a form of reservation which is repeatedly found in children.51Nor are feelings and ideas of this kind restricted to the young; they are fairly common among grown-up people, and have even found expression in ethical doctrines. They lie at the root of the Jesuit theory of mental reservations. According to Thomas Aquinas, again, though it is wrong to tell a lie for the purpose of delivering another from any danger whatever, it is lawful “to hide the truth prudently under some dissimulation, as Augustine says.”52It is not uncommonly argued that in defence of a secret we may not “lie,” that is, produce directly beliefs contrary to facts; but that we may “turn a question aside,” that is, produce indirectly, by natural inference from our answer, a negatively false belief; or that we may “throw the inquirer on a wrong scent,” that is, produce similarly a positively false belief.53This extreme formalism may no doubt to some extent be traced to the influence of early training. From the day we learned to speak, the duty of telling the truth has been strenuously enjoined upon us, and the word “lie” has been associated with sin of theblackest hue; whereas other forms of falsehood, being less frequent, less obvious, and less easy to define, have also been less emphasised. But after full allowance is made for this influence, the fact still remains that a mystic efficacy is very commonly ascribed to the spoken word. Even among ourselves many persons would not dare to praise their health or fortune for fear lest some evil should result from their speech; and among less civilised peoples much greater significance is given to a word than among us. Herodotus, after mentioning the extreme importance which the ancient Persians attached to the duty of speaking the truth, adds that they held it unlawful even “to talk of anything which it is unlawful to do.”54I think, then, we may assume that, if for some reason or other, falsehood is stigmatised, the mysterious tendency inherent in the word easily develops into an avenging power which, as often happens in similar cases, is associated with the activity of a god.

48Stanley Hall, ‘Children’s Lies,’ inAmerican Journal of Psychology, iii. 59sq.

49Stanley Hall, ‘Children’s Lies,’ inAmerican Journal of Psychology, iii. 68sq.

50Bergen and Newell, ‘Current Superstitions,’ inJournal of American Folk-lore, ii. 111.

51Stanley Hall,loc. cit.p. 68.

52Thomas Aquinas,Summa theologica, ii.-ii. 110. 3. 4.

53See Sidgwick,Methods of Ethics, p. 317.

54Herodotus, i. 139.

The punishing power of a word is particularly conspicuous in the case of an oath. But the evil attending perjury does not come from the lie as such: it is in the first place a result of the curse which constitutes the oath. An oath is essentially a conditional self-imprecation, a curse by which a person calls down upon himself some evil in the event of what he says not being true. The efficacy of the oath is originally entirely magical, it is due to the magic power inherent in the cursing words. In order to charge them with supernatural energy various methods are adopted. Sometimes the person who takes the oath puts himself in contact with some object which represents the state referred to in the oath, so that the oath may absorb, as it were, its quality and communicate it to the perjurer. Thus the Kandhs swear upon the lizard’s skin, “whose scaliness they pray may be their lot if forsworn,” or upon the earth of an ant-hill, “like which they desire that, if false, they may be reduced to powder.”55The Tunguses regard it as the most dreadfulof all their oaths when an accused person is compelled to drink some of the blood of a dog which, after its throat has been cut, is impaled near a fire and burnt, or has its flesh scattered about piece-meal, and to swear:—“I speak the truth, and that is as true as it is that I drink this blood. If I lie, let me perish, burn, or be dried up like this dog.”56In other cases the person who is to swear takes hold of a certain object and calls it to inflict on him some injury if he perjure himself. The Kandhs frequently take oath upon the skin of a tiger, “from which animal destruction to the perjured is invoked.”57The Angami Nagas, when they swear to keep the peace, or to perform any promise, “place the barrel of a gun, or a spear, between their teeth, signifying by this ceremony that, if they do not act up to their agreement, they are prepared to fall by either of the two weapons.”58The Chuvashes, again, put a piece of bread and a little salt in the mouth and swear, “May I be in want of these, if I say not true!” or “if I do not keep my word!”59Another method of charging an oath with supernatural energy is to touch, or to establish some kind of contact with, a holy object on the occasion when the oath is taken. The Iowa have a mysterious iron or stone, wrapped in seven skins, by which they make men swear to speak the truth.60The people of Kesam, in the highlands of Palembang, swear by an old sacred knife,61the Bataks of South Tóba on their village idols,62the Ostyaks on the nose of a bear, which is regarded by them as an animal endowed with supernatural power.63Among the Tunguses a criminal may be compelled to climb oneof their sacred mountains, repeating as he mounts, “May I die if I am guilty,” or, “May I lose my children and my cattle,” or, “I renounce for ever all success in hunting and fishing if I am guilty.”64In Tibetan law-courts, when the great oath is taken, “it is done by the person placing a holy scripture on his head, and sitting on the reeking hide of an ox and eating part of the ox’s heart.”65Hindus swear on a copy of the Sanskritharibans, or with Ganges water in their hands, or touch the legs of a Brâhmana in taking an oath.66Muhammedans swear on the Koran, as Christians do on the Bible. In Morocco an oath derives efficacy from contact with, or the presence of, any lifeless object, animal, or person endowed withbaraka, or holiness, such as a saint-house or a mosque, corn or wool, a flock of sheep or a horse, or a shereef. In mediæval Christendom sacred relics were generally adopted as the most effective means of adding security to oaths, and “so little respect was felt for the simple oath that, ere long, the adjuncts came to be looked upon as the essential feature, and the imprecation itself to be divested of binding force without them.”67

55Macpherson,Memorials of Service in India, p. 83.

56Georgi,Russia, iii. 86.

57Macpherson,op. cit.p. 83.Cf.Hose, ‘Natives of Borneo,’ inJour. Anthr. Inst.xxiii. 165 (Kayans).

58Butler,Travels in Assam, p. 154. Mac Mahon,Far Cathay, p. 253. Prain, ‘Angami Nagas,’ inRevue coloniale internationale, v. 490.Cf.Lewin,Wild Races of South-Eastern India, pp. 193 (Toungtha), 244sq.(Pankhos and Bunjogees); St. John, ‘Hill Tribes of North Aracan,’ inJour. Anthr. Inst.ii. 242.

59Georgi,op. cit.i. 110.

60Hamilton, quoted by Dorsey, ‘Siouan Cults,’ inAnn. Rep. Bur. Ethn.xi. 427.

61Glimpses of the Eastern Archipelago, p. 104.

62von Brenner,Besuch bei den Kannibalen Sumatras, p. 213.

63Castrén,Nordiska resor och forskningar, i. 307, 309; iv. 123sq.Cf.Ahlqvist, ‘Unter Wogulen und Ostjaken,’ inActa Societatis Scientiarum Fennicæ, xiv. 298.

64Georgi,op. cit.iii. 86.

65Waddell,Buddhism of Tibet, p. 569, n. 7.

66Grierson,Bihār Peasant Life, p. 401. Sleeman,Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official, ii. 116.

67Lea,Superstition and Force, p. 29. See also Kaufmann,Deutsche Geschichte, ii. 297; Ellinger,Das Verhältniss der öffentlichen Meinung zu Wahrheit und Lüge im 10. 11. und 12. Jahrhundert, pp. 30, 111.

Finally, as an ordinary curse, so an oath is made efficacious by bringing in the name of a supernatural being, to whom an appeal is made. When the Comanches of Texas make a sacred pledge or promise, “they call upon the great spirit as their father, and the earth as their mother, to testify to the truth of their asseverations.”68Of the Chukchi we are told that “as often as they would certify the truth of any thing by oath or solemn protestations they take the sun for their guarantee and security.”69Among the Tunguses an accused person takes a knife in his hand, brandishes it towards the sun, and says, “If Iam guilty, may the sun send diseases into my bowels as mortal as a stab with this knife would be!”70An Arab from the province of Dukkâla in Morocco presses a dagger against his chest, saying, “By this poison, may God thrust it into my heart if I did so or so!” If a Masai is accused of having done something wrong, he drinks some blood, which is given him by the spokesman, and says, “If I have done this deed may God kill me”; and it is believed that if he has committed the crime he dies, whereas no harm befalls him if he is innocent.71Among the Tshi-speaking peoples of the Gold Coast, “to make an oath binding on the person who takes it, it is usual to give him something to eat or to drink which in some way appertains to a deity, who is then invoked to visit a breach of faith with punishment.”72Among the Shekani and Bakele people of Southern Guinea, when a covenant between different tribes is about to be formed, their great spirit, Mwetyi, “is always invoked as a witness, and is commissioned with the duty of visiting vengeance upon the party who shall violate the engagement.”73It seems to be a common practice in certain parts of Africa to swear by some fetish.74The Efatese, of the New Hebrides, invoked punishment from the gods in their oaths.75In Florida, of the Solomon Group, a man will deny an accusation by sometindalo(that is, the disembodied spirit of some man who already in his lifetime was supposed to be endowed with supernatural power), or by the ghostly frigate-bird, or by the ghostly shark.76When an ancient Egyptian wished to give assurance of his honesty and good faith, he called Thoth to witness, the advocate in the heavenly court of justice, without whose justification no soul could stand in the day of judgment.77The Eranians swore by Mithra,78the Greeks by Zeus,79theRomans by Jupiter and Dius Fidius.80A god is more able than ordinary mortals to master the processes of nature, and he may also better know whether the sworn word be true or false.81It is undoubtedly on account of their superior knowledge that sun or moon or light gods are so frequently appealed to in oaths. The Egyptian god Ra is a solar,82and Thoth a lunar83deity. The Zoroastrian Mithra, who “has a thousand senses, and sees every man that tells a lie,”84is closely connected with the sun;85and Rashnu Razista, according to M. Darmesteter, is an offshoot either of Mithra or Ahura Mazda himself.86Dius Fidius seems originally to have been a spirit of the heaven, and a wielder of the lightning, closely allied to the great Jupiter.87Zeus is all-seeing, the infallible spy of both gods and men.88Now, even though the oath has the form of an appeal to a god, it may nevertheless be of a chiefly magic character, being an imprecation rather than a prayer. The oaths which the Moors swear by Allah are otherwise exactly similar in nature to those in which he is not mentioned at all. But the more the belief in magic was shaken, the more the spoken word was divested of that mysterious power which had been attributed to it by minds too apt to confound words with facts, the more prominent became the religious element in the oath. The fulfilment of the self-imprecation was made dependent upon the free will of the deity appealed to, and was regarded as the punishment for an offence committed by the perjurer against the god himself.89

68Neighbors, in Schoolcraft,Indian Tribes of the United States, i. 132.

69Georgi,op. cit.iii. 183.

70Georgi,op. cit.iii. 85sq.

71Hollis,Masai, p. 345.

72Ellis,Tshi-speaking Peoples of the Gold Coast, p. 196.

73Wilson,Western Africa, p. 392.

74Schultze,Der Fetischismus, p. 111.

75Turner,Samoa, p. 334.

76Codrington,op. cit.p. 217.

77Tiele,History of the Egyptian Religion, p. 229. Amélineau,op. cit.p. 251.

78Yasts, x.

79Iliad, iii. 276sqq.Farnell,Cults of the Greek States, i. 70.

80von Lasaulx,Der Eid bei den Römern, p. 9.

81Cf.James,Expedition from Pittsburg to the Rocky Mountains, i. 267 (Omahas); Tylor,Primitive Culture, ii. 231 (Ostyaks).

82Maspero,Dawn of Civilization, p. 87sq.Wiedemann,Religion of the Ancient Egyptians, p. 14. Erman,Handbook of Egyptian Religion, p. 10.

83Maspero,op. cit.p. 145. Erman,op. cit.p. 11.

84Yasts, x. 107.

85Darmesteter, inSacred Books of the East, xxiii. 122, n. 4. Meyer,Geschichte des Alterthums, i. 541sq.Geiger,op. cit.i. p. lvi.

86Darmesteter, inSacred Books of the East, xxiii. 168.

87Fowler,Roman Festivals, p. 141.

88Cf.Iliad, iii. 277; Ovid,Metamorphoses, iv. 172; Darmesteter,Essais orientaux, p. 107; Usener,Götternamen, p. 177sqq.

89Grotius says (De jure belli et pacis, ii. 13. 12) that even he who swears by false gods is bound, “because, though under false notions, he refers to the general idea of Godhead, and therefore the true God will interpret it as a wrong to himself if perjury be committed.”

Owing to its invocation of supernatural sanction, perjury is considered the most heinous of all acts of falsehood.90But it has a tendency to make even the ordinary lie or breach of faith a matter of religious concern. If a god is frequently appealed to in oaths, a general hatred of lying and unfaithfulness may become one of his attributes, as is suggested by various facts quoted above. There is every reason to believe that a god is not, in the first place, appealed to because he is looked upon as a guardian of veracity and good faith, but that he has come to be looked upon as a guardian of these duties because he has been frequently appealed to in connection with them.

Back to Index Next