Scanned text contains errors.
297), Socrates jua tV 'Aj/cww>?y, &c. (Arw&. 627.) (See further Fesp. 83, -4«;es, 54, 1611, /?««-. 336, 1J69.)
Women also had their favourite oaths. As the men preferred swearing by Hercules, Apollo, &c., so the other sex used to swear by Aphrodite, De-meter, and Persephone, Hera, Hecate, Artemis ; and Athenian women by Aglauros, Pandrosus, &c. (Lucian, Dial. Meretr. 7 ; Xcn. Memor. i. 5. § 5; Aristoph. Lysist. 81, 148, 208, 439, Eccles. 70, Thesm. 286, 383, 533 ; Theocr. Idyll, xv. 14.)
The security which an oath was supposed to confer induced the Greeks, as it has people of modern times, to impose it as an obligation upon persons invested with authority, or intrusted with the discharge of responsible duties. (Plato, de Leg. xii. p. 948.) The Athenians, with whom the science of legislation was carried to the greatest perfection, were, of all the Greek states, the most punctilious in this respect. The youth, entering upon his 20th year, was not permitted to assume the privileges of a citizen, or to be registered in the Xy&apxucbv 7payu/uaTe?oj>, without taking a solemn oath in the temple of Aglauros to obey the laws and defend his country. (The form of his oath is preserved in Pollux, viii. 105.) The archon, the judge, and the arbitrator, were required to bind themselves by an oath to perform their respective duties. (See Pollux, I.e. ; Hudtwalcker, uber die Di'dt. p. 10 ; and dicastes.) As to the oath taken by the Senate of Five Hundred, see Demosth. c. Timoc. 745. As to the oath of the witness, and the voluntary oath of parties to an action, see martyria. The importance, at least apparently, attached to oaths in courts of justice, is proved by various passages in the orators. (Andoc. de Myst. 5 ; Lycurg. c. Leocr. 157. ed. Steph.; Antiph. de m. Herod. 139, 140. ed Steph.; Demosth. c. Aphob. 860.) Demosthenes constantly reminds his judges that they are on their oaths, and Lycurgus (I. c.) declares that rb Gvvi-)(QV T'rjv Sfj/JLOKpariav 'dpicos effriy.
The experience of all nations has proved the dangerous tendency of making oaths too common. The history of Athens and of Greece in general furnishes no exception to the observation. While in the popular belief and in common parlance oaths continued to be highly esteemed, they had ceased to be of much real wealth or value. It is impossible to read the plays of Aristophanes, the orators, and other writers of that period, without seeing that perjury had become a practice of ordinary occurrence. The poet who wrote that verse which incurred the censure of the comedian, rj yhucro1' OjUttjyuox', % S* <£pV avdo/jLoros (Eur. Hippol. 612; Aristoph. TJiesm. 275), was not the only person who would thus refine. The bold profligacy described by Aristophanes (Nub. 1232—1241, Equit. 298) was too often realized in action. To trace the degeneracy of the Greek character belongs not to this place. We conclude by reminding our readers that in a later age the Greeks became a by-word among the Romans for lying and bad faith. (Cic.pro Flacco, 4 ; Juv. Sat. iii. 60, &c.) A few expressions deserve notice. nt? is used by Attic writers in affirmative oaths, jua in negative. The old form of affirmation, still preserved by the other Greeks, and used by Xenophon, was val /net. (Xen. Mem. ii. 7. § 14, Apol. Socr. 20.) ntj is nothing more than another form of you, used with an accusative case, jua being omitted, as it often is in negative oaths, (Soph, Oed, Tyr, 660,
1088, Elect. 758,1063.) N^, however, is never used by the tragedians, who always employ a paraphrase in affirmative oaths, such as frsbv ^aprvpecr-Oai. 'ETTOjAvvvat is used affirmatively, cmonvvvai negatively, according to Eustathius. (Horn. Od. ii. 377.) &i6jj.vva6cu is to swear strongly, to protest. (Soph. Track. 378.) "Opiciov, though often used synonymously with opKos, signifies more strictly a compact ratified by oath ; opiaa T&IJLVtur is to make a compact with oaths and sacrifice ; and through the frequent practice of sacrificing on such occasions, it came that flp/aoz/ was sometimes used for the victim itself. (Horn. II. iii. 245.) In the phrase 6jj.vvj/ai Ka(f tep&v, the original meaning of Kara was, that the party laid his hand upon the victims; but the same phrase is used metaphorically in other cases, wheie there could be no such ceremony. Thus Karct, ;^iAiW 6«xV irorfiffcurBai xw&puv (Arist. Equit. 660) is to make a vow to offer a thousand kids ; as though the party voiving layed his hands upon the kids at the time., as a kind of stake. The same observation applies to b^vvvai /car5 e£a>Ae('as. (Comp. La-saulz, Ueber den Eid bei den GriecJien, Wurzburg, 1844.)
2. roman. The subject of Roman oaths may be treated under four different heads, viz.: — 1. Oaths taken by magistrates and other persons who entered the service of the republic. 2. Oaths taken in transactions with foreign nations in the name of the republic. 3. Oaths, or various modes of swearing in common life. 4. Oaths taken before the praetor or in courts of justice.
I. Oaths taken ly magistrates and other persons who entered the service of the republic.— After the establishment of the republic the consuls, and sub-sequentty all the other magistrates, were obliged, within five days after their appointment, to promise on oath that they would protect and observe the laws of the republic (in leges jurare, Liv. xxxi. 50 ; compare Dionys. v. 1.). Vestal virgins and the llamen dialis were not allowed to swear on any occasion (Liv. I. c.; Fest. s. r. Jurare; Pint. Quaest. Rom. p. 275), but whether they also entered upon their sacred offices without taking an oath analogous to that of magistrates is unknown. When a flamen dialis was elected to a magistracy, he might either petition for an especial dispensation (ut legibus solveretur), or < he might depute some one to take the oath for him. But this could riot be done unless the permission was granted by the people. The first Roman consuls seem only to have sworn that they would not restore the kingly government, nor allow any one else to do so (Liv. ii. 1 ; Dionys. L c.), and this may have been the case till all fears of such a restoration having vanished, the oath was changed into a jusjurandum in leges. The consular oafh was occasionally taken under the empire. (Plin. Paneg. 64.)
During the later period of the republic we also find that magistrates, when the time of their office had expired, addressed the people and swore that during their office they had undertaken nothing against the republic, but had done their utmost to promote its welfare. (Cic. ad Fam. v. 2. § 7, pro Sulla, 11, m Pison. 3, pro Dom. 35; Dion Cass. xxxvii. p.52, xxxviii. p. 72, liii.p. 568,ed. Steph.; Liv. xxix. 37.) In some cases a tribune of the people might compel the whole senate to promise on oath that they would observe a plebiscitiim,
u u 3