FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82  
83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   >>  
_honorable people_--what the man who uttered the insult--even though he were the greatest wretch on earth--was pleased to call him; for he has _put up with_ the insult--the technical term, I believe. Accordingly, all _honorable people_ will have nothing more to do with him, and treat him like a leper, and, it may be, refuse to go into any company where he may be found, and so on. This wise proceeding may, I think, be traced back to the fact that in the Middle Age, up to the fifteenth century, it was not the accuser in any criminal process who had to prove the guilt of the accused, but the accused who had to prove his innocence.[1] This he could do by swearing he was not guilty; and his backers--_consacramentales_--had to come and swear that in their opinion he was incapable of perjury. If he could find no one to help him in this way, or the accuser took objection to his backers, recourse was had to trial by _the Judgment of God_, which generally meant a duel. For the accused was now _in disgrace_,[2] and had to clear himself. Here, then, is the origin of the notion of disgrace, and of that whole system which prevails now-a-days amongst _honorable people_--only that the oath is omitted. This is also the explanation of that deep feeling of indignation which _honorable people_ are called upon to show if they are given the lie; it is a reproach which they say must be wiped out in blood. It seldom comes to this pass, however, though lies are of common occurrence; but in England, more than elsewhere, it is a superstition which has taken very deep root. As a matter of order, a man who threatens to kill another for telling a lie should never have told one himself. The fact is, that the criminal trial of the Middle Age also admitted of a shorter form. In reply to the charge, the accused answered: _That is a lie_; whereupon it was left to be decided by _the Judgment of God_. Hence, the code of knightly honor prescribes that, when the lie is given, an appeal to arms follows as a matter of course. So much, then, for the theory of insult. [Footnote 1: See C.G. von Waehter's _Beitraege zur deutschen Geschichte_, especially the chapter on criminal law.] [Footnote 2: _Translator's Note_.--It is true that this expression has another special meaning in the technical terminology of Chivalry, but it is the nearest English equivalent which I can find for the German--_ein Bescholtener_] But there is something even worse than insult
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82  
83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   >>  



Top keywords:

people

 

insult

 
accused
 

honorable

 

criminal

 

matter

 

Footnote

 

Middle

 

accuser

 
disgrace

backers
 

Judgment

 

technical

 
charge
 
answered
 

decided

 

shorter

 
knightly
 

superstition

 
England

occurrence

 
common
 
prescribes
 

telling

 

uttered

 

threatens

 
admitted
 

special

 

meaning

 
terminology

Chivalry
 

expression

 

Translator

 

nearest

 

English

 

Bescholtener

 

equivalent

 

German

 

chapter

 
theory

appeal
 
deutschen
 

Geschichte

 

Beitraege

 

Waehter

 
opinion
 

incapable

 

perjury

 

guilty

 

consacramentales