Title: JOHN KERRIGAN. Shakespeare’s Binding Language.
Abstract:What is the difference between saying something, and swearing it? Does an oath augment a ‘bare asseveration’? If so, is this augmentation a good thing? The Bible gives ambiguous guidance; the Third Co...What is the difference between saying something, and swearing it? Does an oath augment a ‘bare asseveration’? If so, is this augmentation a good thing? The Bible gives ambiguous guidance; the Third Commandment prohibits taking God’s name ‘in vain’, but Deuteronomy 6 permits swearing by the name of God in serious matters, and God Himself, when he covenants with Abraham, ‘because He could swear by no greater, He swore by Himself’ (Hebrews 6:13). Jesus, on the other hand, seems to prohibit all oaths: ‘Swear not at all … let your communication be, yea, yea, or nay, nay. For whatsoever is more than these, cometh of evil.’ (Matthew 5:34-7). There is a similar chariness in the classical tradition: since, as many Stoics argued, a virtuous man tells truth and keeps his promises, his oath is superfluous. In Julius Caesar, Brutus thus dismisses the need for an oath among the conspirators: ‘What other bond/Than secret Romans that have spoke the word/And will not palter? And what other oath/Than honesty to honesty engaged?’ (2.1.125-127).Read More
Publication Year: 2016
Publication Date: 2016-10-11
Language: en
Type: article
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 1
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot