second approach, one cannor tell w ithout more information. If the oath is used because there is considerable bewilderment about what shoidd be done-but something must be done-then the oath is The Last Best (diance. But there may be in a particular society firm belief in the deitx 's inteiw ention. With the third approach, w here it appears in isolation without also the presence of the other two, we ha\ e to do w ith Lhe Last Best Cdiance. Lhe basic reliance is on using rational e\ idence. W hen there is considerable e\ idence against the accused, but not quite so much as to constitute the proof required bv the legal s\'stem, then there ma\’ be recourse to the oath. Of course, the hope w ill e.xist that the threat of the proof of the oath will induce a guiltx’ accused to confess, thus pro\ iding w hat was lacking for proof. \ CdoseK' similar to the oath is trial b\’ ordeal. 'Trial bv ordeal has not necessarib alwa\'S the same justification, not e\en perhaps in a limited geographical area such as Western ICurope. My discussion here w ill be limited to part of the earliest e\ idence for Western luirojie. 'Trial h\- ordeal seems in luirope to ha\e emerged from I'rankish custom, and it is first recorded in the Pdctns Sdliaic attributed to King (do\ is and which was issued between >07 and 'The ordeal was that of the cauldron. ' According to CTegorx’ of 'Lours, the cauklron was set on a fire, a ring was tossed into the bubbling water, and the person undergoing the ordeal had to pluck it out, not an 24 See, e.g., Robert Bartlett. Trial by Fire and W'afer (Oxford, 1980), p.4; Katherine Fischer Drew, The Laws of the Salian Franks (Philadelphia, 1991), p. 28. 25 I am ignoring here the ordeal by lot, which was also accepted in Salic Law. 135
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=