Save

Invoking Humans in Roman-Era Oaths: Emotional Relations and Divine Ambiguity

In: Numen
Author:
Moshe Blidstein Department of History and the Haifa Center for Mediterranean History, University of Haifa Haifa Israel

Search for other papers by Moshe Blidstein in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7488-6324
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution

Purchase

Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

$40.00

Abstract

This article examines Roman-era oaths invoking nondeities, especially persons. It argues that rather than invoking quasi-deities or persons to be punished by the gods in case of perjury, as usually understood in the past, these invocations could have two concurrent functions: honoring the invoked persons and affirming a statement. Though such invocations had limited legal power, they were commonly practiced throughout the period, as demonstrated in various textual genres, including Latin poetry and rhetoric, texts of the Second Sophistic, Jewish rabbinical writings, and 5th-century Christian sermons. Furthermore, nondivine invocations were frequently combined and mingled with divine invocations, with only theologically inclined authors attempting to define them clearly as a separate category. This interpretation has significance for understanding some equivocal oaths, such as the oath by the emperor, as well as for our perception of oaths in general as a speech act with functions going beyond the affirmation of a statement.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 639 118 4
Full Text Views 53 12 0
PDF Views & Downloads 129 29 0