1. Originally the oath of a covenant was taken by solemnly sacrificing sercn animals, or it was attested by seven witnesses or pledges, consisting either of so many animals presented to the contracting party, or of me- morials erected to testify to the act, as is indicated by one of the Hebrew names for oath (n"in"iy), which properly denotes seven, and by the verb to swear (S'^t'D), which means to sei^en, to produce seven (comp. Gen. xxi, 28-31 ; Knobel, Comment, on Gen. ad loc).
2. Another primitive custom which obtained in the patriarchal age was that the one who took the oath " put his hand inidcr the thigh" of the adjurer (Gen. xxiv, 2; xlvii, 29). This practice evidently arose from the fact that the genital member, which is meant by the euphemistic expression "thigh" ("jT^), was regarded as the most sacred part of the body, being the symbol of union in the tenderest relation of matrimoniiil life, and the seat whence all issue proceeds, and the perpetuity so much coveted bj^ the ancients (comp. the phrase ■j-i'i iXI^I"', Gen. xlvi, 26; Exod. i, 5; Judg. viii, 30). Hence this creative organ became the symbol of the Creator and the object of worship among all nations of antiquity (comp. Ezek. xvi, 17; Jerome, Comment, in Hos. iv ; Nork, Etymologisch-symholisch-mythologisches Real- WOrterbuch, s. v. Phalluscultus ; Pauly, Reul-En- cyklopddie d. classic/ten Alterthumsirissenschaft, s. v. Phallus) ; and it is for this reason that God claimed it as the sign of the covenant between himself and his
OATH
258
OATH
chosen people in the rite of circumcision. Nothing, therefore, could render the oath more solemn in those days than tdUfliiug the symbol of creation, the sign of the covenant, and the source of that issue who may at any future i)criod avenge the breaking of a compact made with tlieir jirogenitor. To this effect is the ex- planation of the jMidrash, the Chaldee paraphrase of Jonathan bcn-Uzziel, Kashi, and the oldest Jewish ex- positors, though it simply specifies the covenant of cir- cumcision. Further from the point is the opinion of Aben-Ezra, followed by Kosenm tiller and others, that it is used as a symbol of submission on the part of the servant to his master. "It appears to me more prob- able," says Aben-Ezra, " that it was the custom of those days for a servant to place his hand on his master's thigh; and the meaning of the phrase is, Now if thou art under my subjection, put thy hand on my thigh. The master sat with [the servant's] hand on his thigh, as if saying. Behold my hand is in subjection to thee to execute thy will. And tliis custom still obtains in India" {Comment, on Gen. xxiv, 2). ]\Iore unnatural is the explanation of Grotius, that Eliezer put his hand on Abraham's thigh, where the sword was hanging (Psa. xlv, 3), as much as to say, "If I falsify my word, may I perish by thy sword ;" or that of Michaelis, that it alludes to a supposed custom of pressing blood from the hand by putting it under the thigh.
3. A less usual form of oath or ratification was divid- ing a victim and passing between or distributing the pieces (Gen. xv, 10, 17; Jer. xxxiv, 18). This form was probably used to intensify the imprecation already ratified by sacrifice according to the custom described by classical writers imder the phrases opKta Tfjivitv, Jmliis J'erire, etc. We may perhaps regard in this view the acts recorded in Judg. xix, 29; 1 Sam. xi, 7 ; and possibly in Herod, vii. 30.
4. The more general custom, however, was to lift up the right hand towards heaven, pointing to the throne of him who was invoked as witness to the truth and avenger of falsehood (Gen. xiv, 22; Dent, xxxii, 40; Dan. xii, 7; liev. x, 5, 6). Hence the phrase, '-to lift up the hand," came to denote to swear, to take an oath, and is even applied to the Deity (Exod. vi, 8 ; Psa. cvi, 26 : Ezek. xx, 5). These practices chiefly refer to oaths taken in ))rivate intercourse, or on extra-judicial occa- sions. The maimer in which a judicial oath was taken is thus described in the Jewish codes: "The oath-taker held the scroll of the Law in his arms, stood up and swore either by the name of God or by any one of his attributes, with or without an imprecation (ri"13T3 n?S3 IX), uttering it either by himself or repeating it after the judge; and this jtidicial oath, according to the enactment of our rabbins, had to be taken in the Hebrew language. If he pronounced the oath by him- self, and without an imprecation, he said, ' I swear by Jehovah, the God of Israel, or by him who is merciful, or by him who is compassionate, that I owe notliing to this man;' and if with an imprecation he said, • Behold I am accursed of Jehovah, or of him who is mereifid, if I possess anything belonging to this man.' And if the judges spoke the oath, they said to him, 'We adjure thee by Jehovah, the (iod of Israel, or by him who is merciful, that thou hast notliing which belongs to that man.' To which he replied, 'Amen!' Or they said, 'Behold A, the son of so-and-so, is accursed of .leho- vali, the God of Israel, or of him who is merciful, if he lias any money in his possession and does not confess it to the owner;' and he responded, 'Amen!'" (Maimonides, J«(Z ha-Chezaka, Ililchoth Shebuoth, xi, 8-10). Instead of holding the Law, the oath-taker was also allowed to touch the phylacteries (Maimonides, ibid.). This simple response, Amen {'{Z^), or Thou hast said it {uv HTrai;\ which was all that was required to constitute an oath in case any one was adjured (Numb. V, 19; Jlishna, Shebuoth, iii, 11; iv, 3), ex- plains the reply of our Saviour (Matt, xxvi, (J3, 64).