an ancient form of trial. See Trial. —It was an appeal to the immediate interposition of divine power, and was peculiarly distinguished by the appellation of judicium Dei; and sometimes vulgaris purgatio, to distinguish it from the canonical purgation, which was by the oath of the party. There were two sorts of it more common than the rest, at least in Europe, fire-ordeal, and water-ordeal. The former was confined to persons of higher rank, the latter to the common people. Both these might be performed by deputy: but the principal was to answer for the success of the trial; the deputy only venturing some corporal pain, for hire or perhaps for friendship.
That the purgation by ordeal, of some one kind or other, is very ancient, admits not of a doubt; and that it was very universal in the times of superstitious barbarity, is equally certain. It seems even to have been known to the ancient Greeks: for in the Antigone of Sophocles, a person suspected by Creon of a misdemeanor, declares himself ready "to handle hot iron and to walk over fire" in order to manifest his innocence; which the scholiast tells us was then a very usual purgation. And Grotius gives us many instances of water-ordeal in Bithynia, Sardinia, and other places. It seems, however, to be carried to a greater height among the Hindoos, than ever it has been in any nation or among any people however rude or barbarous; for in a paper of the Asiatic Researches communicated by the celebrated Warren Hastings, Esq.; we find that the trial by ordeal among them is conducted in nine different ways: first, by the balance; secondly, by fire; thirdly, by water; fourthly, by poison; fifthly, by the Cofha, or water in which an idol has been washed; sixthly, by rice; seventhly, by boiling oil; eighthly, by red-hot iron; ninthly, by images.
I. Ordeal by the balance is thus performed. The beam having been previously adjusted, the cord fixed, and both scales made perfectly even, the person accused and a Pandit fast a whole day; then, after the accused has been bathed in sacred water, the homa, or oblation, presented to fire, and the deities worshipped, he is carefully weighed; and, when he is taken out of the scale, the Pandits prostrate themselves before it, pronounce a certain mantra or incantation, agreeably to the Sastras, and, having written the substance of the accusation on a piece of paper, bind it on his head. Six minutes after, they place him again in the scale; and, if he weigh more than before, he is held guilty; if less, innocent; if exactly the same, he must be weighed a third time; when, as it is written in the Mitakshara, there will certainly be a difference in his weight. Should the balance, though well fixed, break down, this would be considered as a proof of his guilt.
II. For the fire-ordeal, an excavation, nine hands long, two spans broad, and one span deep, is made in the ground, and filled with a fire of pippal wood: into this the person accused must walk barefooted; and, if his foot be unhurt, they hold him blameless; if burned, guilty (a).
(A) In Europe fire-ordeal was performed either by taking up in the hand, unhurt, a piece of red-hot iron, of one, two, or three pounds weight; or else by walking, barefoot, and blindfold, over nine red-hot ploughshares, laid lengthwise at unequal distances: and if the party escaped being hurt, he was adjudged innocent; but if it happened otherwise, as without collusion it usually did, he was then condemned as guilty. However, by this latter method Queen Emma, the mother of Edward the Confessor, is mentioned to have clear III. Water ordeal is performed by causing the person accused to stand in a sufficient depth of water, either flowing or stagnant, to reach his navel; but care should be taken, that no ravenous animal be in it, and that it be not moved by much air: a brahmin is then directed to go into the water, holding a staff in his hand; and a fuller shoots three arrows on dry ground from a bow of cane: a man is next dispatched to bring the arrow which has been shot farthest; and, after he has taken it up, another is ordered to run from the edge of the water; at which instant the person accused is told to grasp the foot or the staff of the brahmin, who stands near him in the water, and immediately to dive into it. He must remain under water, till the two men, who went to fetch the arrows, are returned; for, if he raise his head or body above the surface, before the arrows are brought back, his guilt is considered as fully proved. In the villages near Benares, it is the practice for the person who is to be tried by this kind of ordeal, to stand in water up to his navel, and then, holding the foot of a brahmin, to dive under it as long as a man can walk 50 paces very gently; if, before the man has walked thus far, the accused rise above the water, he is condemned; if not, acquitted (b).
IV. There are two sorts of trial by poison; first, the Pandits having performed their homa, and the person accused his ablution, two rettis and a half, or seven barley-corns, of vilbanaga, a poisonous root, or of junc'hyra, that is, white arsenic, are mixed in eight maha's, or 64 rettis, of clarified butter, which the accused must eat from the hand of a brahmin: if the poison produce no visible effect, he is absolved; otherwise, condemned. Secondly, the hooded snake, called naga, is thrown into a deep earthen pot, into which is dropped a ring, a seal, or a coin: this the person accused is ordered to take out with his hand; and, if the serpent bite him, he is pronounced guilty; if not, innocent.
V. Trial by the cosha is as follows: the accused is made to drink three draughts of the water, in which the images of the sun, of devi, and other deities, have been washed for that purpose; and if, within 14 days, he has any sickness or indisposition, his crime is considered as proved.
VI. When several persons are suspected of theft, some dry rice is weighed with the sacred stone called salgram, or certain floca are read over it; after which the suspected persons are severally ordered to chew a quantity of it: as soon as they have chewed it, they are to throw it on some leaves of pipal, or, if none be at hand, on some b'burja patra, or bark of a tree from Nepal or Kashmir. The man, from whose mouth the rice comes dry or stained with blood, is held guilty, the rest are acquitted.
VII. The ordeal by hot oil is very simple: when it is heated sufficiently, the accused thrusts his hand into it; and, if he be not burned, is held innocent (c).
---
ed her character, when suspected of familiarity with Alwyn bishop of Winchester. The first account we have of Christians appealing to the fire-ordeal, as a proof of their innocence, is that of Simplicius, bishop of Au-tun, who lived in the fourth century. This prelate, as the story is related, before his promotion to the episcopal order, had married a wife, who loved him tenderly, and who, unwilling to quit him after his advancement, continued to sleep in the same chamber with him. The sanctity of Simplicius suffered, at least in the voice of fame, by the constancy of his wife's affection; and it was rumoured about, that the holy man, though a bishop, persisted, in opposition to the ecclesiastical canons, to taste the sweets of matrimony: upon which his wife, in the presence of a great concourse of people, took up a considerable quantity of burning coals, which she held in her cloaths, and applied to her breasts, without the least hurt to her person or her garments, as the legend says; and her example being followed by her husband with the like succeds, the filly multitude admired the miracle, and proclaimed the innocence of the loving pair. A similar trick was played by St Brice, in the fifth century. Moth. Eccl. Hist. v. 2.
(b) A very peculiar species of water-ordeal is said to prevail among the Indians on the coast of Malabar. A person accused of an enormous crime is obliged to swim over a large river abounding with crocodiles; and if he escapes unhurt, he is deemed innocent.
At Siam, besides the usual methods of fire and water ordeal, both parties are sometimes exposed to the fury of a tiger let loose for that purpose; and if the beast spares either, that person is accounted innocent; if neither, both are held to be guilty; but if he spares both, the trial is incomplete, and they proceed to a more certain criterion.
In Europe water-ordeal was performed, either by plunging the bare arm up to the elbow in boiling-water, and escaping unhurt thereby, or by casting the person suspected into a river or pond of cold water; and if he floated therein without any action of swimming, it was deemed an evidence of his guilt; but if he sunk, he was acquitted. It is easy to trace out the traditional relics of this water-ordeal, in the ignorant barbarity still practised in many countries to discover witches, by casting them into a pool of water, and drowning them to prove their innocence. And in the Eastern empire the fire-ordeal was used for the same purpose by the emperor Theodore Lascaris; who, attributing his sickness to magic, caused all those whom he suspected to handle the hot iron: thus joining (as has been well remarked) to the most dubious crime in the world, the most dubious proof of innocence.
(c) This species of trial by ordeal is thus performed: The ground appointed for the trial is cleared and rubbed with cow-dung; and the next day at sun-rise the Pandit worships Ganéfa or the Hindoo Janus, presents his oblations, and pays adoration to other deities, conformably to the Sástra: then having read the incantation prescribed, he places a round pan of gold, silver, copper, iron, or clay, with a diameter of sixteen fingers, and four fingers deep; and throws into it one fer, or eighty seca weight, of clarified butter or oil of sesamum. After this a ring of gold, VIII. In the same manner, they make an iron ball, or the head of a lance, red-hot, and place it in the hands of the person accused; who, if it burn him not, is judged guiltless.
IX. To perform the ordeal by dharmarch, which is the name of the flaca appropriated to this mode of trial, either an image, named Dharmas, or the genius of justice, is made of silver, and another called Adharma, of clay or iron, both of which are thrown into a large earthen jar; and the accused having thrust his hand into it, is acquitted if he bring out the silver image, but condemned if he draw forth the iron; or, the figure of a deity is painted on white cloth, and another on black; the first of which they name dharmas, and the second adharma; these are severally rolled up in cow-dung, and thrown into a large jar without having ever been shown to the accused; who must put his hand into the jar, and is acquitted or convicted as he draws out the figure on white or on black cloth.
Though we have proceeded thus far, we have not exhausted Mr Hafting's communication. He goes on to show (to greater extent than our limits permit us to follow him) the manner in which each ordeal abovementioned was executed, giving examples, and unfolding other particulars of some importance in developing the nature of these barbarous customs. For these particulars, however, we must refer to the book itself. But as this subject unquestionably occupies an important department in the history of human superstition, we shall give the Indian law of ordeal from the same paper; when we shall introduce some further particulars concerning this extraordinary custom, which are not to be found in the above account, but which deserve to be noticed.
1. The balance, fire, water, poison, the idol—these are the ordeals used here below for the proof of innocence, when the accusations are heavy, and when the accuser offers to hazard a mulet (if he should fail):
2. Or one party may be tried, if he please, by ordeal, and the other must then risk an amercement; but the trial may take place even without any wager, if the crime committed be injurious to the prince.
3. The sovereign, having summoned the accused while his clothes are yet moist from bathing, at sunrise, before he has broken his fast, shall cause all trials by ordeal to be conducted in the presence of Brāhmans.
4. The balance is for women, children, old men, the blind, the lame, Brāhmans, and the sick; for the Sudra, fire or water, or seven barley-corns of poison.
5. Unless the loss of the accuser amount to a thousand pieces of silver, the accused must not be tried by the red-hot ball, nor by poison, nor by the scales; but if the offence be against the king, or if the crime be heinous, he must acquit himself by one of those trials in all cases.
6. He who has recourse to the balance must be attended by persons experienced in weighing, and go down into one scale, with an equal weight placed in the other, and a groove (with water in it) marked on the beam.
7. 'Thou, O balance, art the mansion of truth; thou wast anciently contrived by deities: declare the truth, therefore, O giver of succours, and clear me from all suspicion.'
8. 'If I am guilty, O venerable as my own mother, then sink me down; but if innocent, raise me aloft.' Thus shall he address the balance.
9. If he sink he is convicted, or if the scales be broken; but if the string be not broken, and he rise aloft, he must be acquitted.
10. On the trial by fire, let both hands of the accused be rubbed with rice in the husk, and well examined: then let seven leaves of the Añjana tree (the religious fig-tree) be placed on them, and bound with seven threads.
11. 'Thou, O fire, pervadest all beings; O cause of purity, who givest evidence of virtue and of sin, declare the truth in this my hand.'
12. When he has pronounced this, the priest shall place in both his hands an iron ball, red-hot, and weighing fifty (d) pala.
13. Having taken it, he shall step gradually into seven circles, each with a diameter of sixteen fingers, and separated from the next by the same space.
14. If, having cast away the hot ball, he shall again have his hands rubbed with rice in the husk, and shall show them unburned, he will prove his innocence. Should the iron fall during the trial, or should a doubt arise (on the regularity of the proceedings), he must be tried again.
15. 'Preserve me, O Varuna, by declaring the truth.' Thus having invoked the god of waters, the accused shall plunge his head into the river or pool, and hold both thighs of a man, who shall stand in it up to his navel:
16. A swift runner shall then hasten to fetch an arrow shot at the moment of his plunging; and if, while the runner is gone, the priest shall see the head of
gold, or silver, or iron, is cleaned and washed with water, and cast into the oil; which they proceed to heat, and when it is very hot put into it a fresh leaf of pippala, or of bilewa: when the leaf is burned, the oil is known to be sufficiently hot. Then, having pronounced a mantra over the oil, they order the party accused to take the ring out of the pan; and if he take it out without being burned, or without a blister on his hand, his innocence is considered as proved; if not, his guilt.
(d) A pala is four carshas, and a carsha eighty radicas, or seeds of the Ganga creeper, each weighing above a grain and a quarter, or, correctly, 1/3 gr.
* It is reported, that this custom, with some slight variations, still prevails among the Indians on the coast of Malabar. The process there is said to begin after the accused person has been thoroughly walked in the presence of the prince of the country, the priest, &c.—the pot is filled with boiling lead; and the accused must take the ring out three times successively. On the Malabar coast, this ordeal seems only to be used when the person is accused of a capital crime; for after the process the arm is bound with cloth and sealed; and after several days, being brought out publicly, and the arm inspected, if it is found burnt he is instantly put to death; if not, his accuser undergoes the same trial, and being burnt, forfeits his life. of the accused under water, he must be discharged as innocent.
17. 'Thou, O poison, art the child of Brahmi, steadfast in justice and in truth; clear me then from this heavy charge, and, if I have spoken truly, become nectar to me.'
18. Saying this, he shall swallow the poison Sárnga, from the tree, which grows on the mountain Himá-laya; and if he digests it without any inflammation, the prince shall pronounce him guiltless.
19. Or the priest shall perform rites to the image of some tremendous deity; and, having bathed the idol, shall make the accused to drink three handfuls of the water that has dropped from it:
20. If in fourteen days after he suffer no dreadful calamity from the act of the deity or of the king, he must indubitably be acquitted."
The superstitious weakness of mankind, when left to themselves, is astonishing. There is indeed nothing so absurd but they may be made most firmly to believe, nor so impious but they will do. Nor can a more notorious instance of the truth of this assertion be publicly given than that of the trial by ordeal. The gross absurdity as well as impiety of pronouncing a man guilty unless he was cleared by a miracle, and of expecting that all the powers of nature should be suspended by an immediate interposition of providence to save the innocent, whenever it was presumptuously required, is self-evident. Yet the origin of it may be traced as well to necessity as to superstition. At the time in which it originated in England, as well as in other countries of Europe, it was no easy matter for an innocent person, when accused of guilt, to get himself cleared by the then established mode of trial (See Trial). It was therefore natural for superstition to fly to Heaven for those testimonies of innocence which the absurdity of human laws often prevented men from obtaining in the ordinary way; and in this way doubts did the trial by ordeal commence; and thus begun by necessities superstition, it was fostered by impious priesthood and unjust power. There was during all the processes great room for collusion and deceit; and there can be no question but it was often practised; it could not therefore on any account, or in any case, be a sign of innocence or of guilt.
Besides those particular methods of trial which we have already mentioned, there were some few more common in European countries; as the judicial combat—the ordeal of the cross—the ordeal of the cornfield.
The judicial combat was well suited to the genius and spirit of fierce and warlike nations, and was, as we may reasonably expect, one of the most ancient and universal modes of trial. We know that it was exceedingly common in Germany in very remote ages. It was also used in some countries on the continent at pretty early periods; it is not, however, mentioned in any of the Anglo-Saxon laws; and it does not appear to have been much used in England till after the Conquest. There are, however, two remarkable instances of it upon record, which we shall give in the words of Dr Henry: "Henry de Essex, hereditary standard-bearer of England, fled from a battle in Wales, A.D. 1158, threw from him the royal standard, and cried out, with others, that the king was slain. Some time after, he was accused of having done this with a treasonable intention, by Robert de Montfort, another great baron, who offered to prove the truth of his accusation by combat. Henry de Essex denied the charge, and accepted the challenge. When all preliminaries were adjusted, this combat was accordingly fought, in the presence of Henry II. and all his court. Essex was defeated, and expected to be carried out to immediate execution. But the king, who was no friend to this kind of trial, spared his life, and contented himself with confiscating his estate, and making him a monk in the abbey of Reading.
"The priory of Tinmouth, in Northumberland, was a cell of the abbey of St Albans's. One Simon of Tinmouth claimed a right to two cornfields, or the maintenance of two persons in the priory, which the prior and monks denied. This cause was brought before the abbot of St Albans's, and his court-baron, who appointed it to be tried by combat on a certain day, before him and his barons. Ralf Gubion, prior of Tinmouth, appeared at the time and place appointed, attended by his champion, one William Pegun, a man of gigantic stature. The combat was fought, Pegun was defeated, and the prior lost his cause; at which he was so much chagrined, that he immediately resigned his office. This judicial combat is the more remarkable, that it was fought in the court of a spiritual baron, and that one of the parties was a priest."
We need scarcely add, that this detectable form of trial was the foundation of the no less detectable crime of duelling, which to much disgraces our age and nation; which is defended only by ignorance, false honour, and injustice; which is a relic of barbarous superstition; and which was absolutely unknown to those brave and generous nations, the Greeks and Romans, which it is so much the fashion to admire, and who in this particular so well merit our imitation. See Duel.
It was so much the custom in the middle ages of Christianity, to respect the cross even to superstition, that it would have been indeed wonderful if the same ignorant bigotry had not converted it into an ordeal: accordingly we find it used for this purpose, in so many different ways as almost to preclude description. We shall however transcribe, for the satisfaction of our readers, Dr Henry's account of it, and of the cornfield: "In criminal trials, the judgment of the cross was commonly thus conducted. When the prisoner had declared his innocence upon oath, and appealed to the judgment of the cross, two sticks were prepared exactly like one another; the figure of the cross was cut on one of these sticks, and nothing on the other: each of them was then wrapped up in a quantity of fine white wool, and laid on the altar, or on the relics of the saints; after which a solemn prayer was put up to God, that he would be pleased to discover, by evident signs, whether the prisoner was innocent or guilty. These solemnities being finished, a priest approached the altar, and took up one of the sticks, which was uncovered with much anxiety. If it was the stick marked with the cross, the prisoner was pronounced innocent; if it was the other, he was declared guilty. When the judgment of the cross was appealed to in civil causes, the trial was conducted in this manner: The judges, parties, and all concerned, being assembled in a church, each of the parties chose a priest, a priest, the youngest and stoutest that he could find, to be his representative in the trial. These representatives were then placed one on each side of some famous crucifix; and at a signal given, they both at once stretched their arms at full length, so as to form a cross with their body. In this painful posture they continued to stand while divine service was performing; and the party whose representative dropped his arms first lost his cause.
"The corned, or the consecrated bread and cheese, was the ordeal to which the clergy commonly appealed when they were accused of any crimes; in which they acted a very prudent part, as it was attended with no danger or inconvenience. This ordeal was performed in this manner: A piece of barley-bread, and a piece of cheese, were laid upon the altar, over which a priest pronounced certain conjurations, and prayed with great fervency, that if the person accused was guilty, God would send his angel Gabriel to stop his throat, that he might not be able to swallow that bread and cheese. These prayers being ended, the culprit approached the altar, took up the bread and cheese, and began to eat it. If he swallowed freely, he was declared innocent; but if it stuck in his throat, and he could not swallow, (which we may presume seldom or never happened), he was pronounced guilty."
There were besides these a variety of other ordeals practised in Christian countries, many of which retain the same names as among Pagans, and differ only in the mode of execution. In all nations of Christians where these trials were used, we find the clergy engaged in them. Indeed, in England, so late as King John's time, we find grants to the bishops and clergy to use the judicium ferri, aquae, et ignis. And, both in England and Sweden, the clergy presided at this trial, and it was only performed in the churches or in other consecrated ground: for which Steinhook gives the reason, Non defuit illis opere et laboris pretium; semper enim ab ejusmodi judicio aliquid lucri faceret illos obviencebat. But, to give it its due praise, we find the canon law very early declaring against trial by ordeal, or vulgaris purgatio, as being the fabric of the devil, cum fit contra praecptum Domini, Non tentabis Dominum Deum tuum. Upon this authority, though the canons themselves were of no validity in England, it was thought proper (as had been done in Denmark above a century before) to disfranchise this trial entirely in our courts of justice, by an act of parliament in 3 Hen. III. according to Sir Edward Coke, or rather by an order of the king in council.
It may still perhaps be a perplexity with some of our readers how the effects of these trials were evaded, and how it was possible to appear to do, what we know could not be really done, without material injury to the persons concerned: and here we find the subject so well handled by the learned historian whom we have already quoted, as far as concerns the ordeals in ancient Britain, which mutatis mutandis will answer for others, that we shall finish the article, which has already extended we fear to too great a length, in his words: "If we suppose that few or none escaped conviction who exposed themselves to those fiery trials, we shall be very much mistaken. For the histories of those times contain innumerable examples of persons plunging their naked arms into boiling water, handling red-hot balls of iron, and walking upon burning ploughshares, without receiving the least injury. Many learned men have been much puzzled to account for this, and disposed to think that Providence graciously interposed, in a miraculous manner, for the preservation of injured innocence. But if we examine every circumstance of those fiery ordeals with due attention, we shall see sufficient reason to suspect that the whole was a gross imposition on the credulity of mankind. The accused person was committed wholly to the priest who was to perform the ceremony three days before the trial, in which he had time enough to bargain with him for his deliverance, and give him instructions how to act his part. On the day of trial, no person was permitted to enter the church but the priest and the accused till after the iron was heated, when twelve friends of the accuser, and twelve of the accused, and no more, were admitted, and ranged along the wall on each side of the church, at a respectful distance. After the iron was taken out of the fire, several prayers were said; the accused drank a cup of holy water, and sprinkled his hand with it, which might take a considerable time, if the priest was indulgent. The space of nine feet was measured by the accused himself with his own feet, and he would probably give but scanty measure. He was obliged only to touch one of the marks with the toe of his right foot, and allowed to stretch the other foot as far towards the other mark as he could, so that the conveyance was almost instantaneous. His hand was not immediately examined, but wrapped in a cloth prepared for that purpose three days. May we not then, from all these precautions, suspect that these priests were in possession of some secret that secured the hand from the impressions of such a momentary touch of hot iron, or removed all appearances of these impressions in three days; and that they made use of this secret when they saw reason? Such readers as are curious in matters of this kind may find two different directions for making ointments that will have this effect, in the work here quoted. What greatly strengthens these Du Cange, suppositions is, that we meet with no example of any Gaff. t. 3. champion of the church who suffered the least injury from the touch of hot iron in this ordeal; but when any one was so fool-hardy as to appeal to it, or to that of hot water, with a view to deprive the church of any of her possessions, he never failed to burn his fingers, and lose his cause."