I'm reading several stories of the Spanish invasion of America. At each new point of invasion, a very odd event occurred.
It was called the "requerimiento". The Spanish flag would be raised, and the invaders gathered around while a lengthy document was read -- in Spanish -- announcing to the inhabitants that Spain was taking over, that they were required to submit, become Christians, and work for the Spanish. The alternative was torture and execution. Gritty talk, from a feckless enemy. The inhabitants, who were typically lurking in the forest, would look at each other, no doubt, and shrug.
And then the killing started. But...it was ok, since the requerimiento had been read.
Talk about performative utterances. Certainly in the Hall of Fame of performatives, and maybe the #1 all time, given the consequences. The English and French had no such attachment to ceremony, and began the stealing and killing more casually.
But, a footnote:
I've always been enchanted with the phrase "In the name of....", followed by God, or the king, or Christ, or Miles the Cat, or whatever. Usually, it is a notification that something bad is about to happen to the listener. Occasionally, it is something good: "In the name of the Queen, I award you this prize...".
But, what is the point? Why not just give the prize, or shoot the gun, or bless the ship? If it just evokes the power of the king, or Miles the Cat, why not just say "The King awards you this prize..."? What's up with the "name of" stuff?
Turns out, there is not much speculation on the internet, at least. I turn to Alert Reader to send either Reader's own thoughts, or anything that pertains. Strange language. Great performative material.
I did find this in the American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms:
in the name of phrases / idioms
1. By the authority of, as in Open up, in the name of the law! [Late 1300s]
2. On behalf of, as in She made a donation in her daughter's name. [Late 1300s]
3. in God's or heaven's name; in the name of God or heaven. With appeal to, as in In the name of God, stop that noise! or What in heaven's name are you doing? [c. a.d. 900]
4. Under the designation of, as in They burned witches at the stake in the name of piety. [Late 1300s]
5. Under the possession or ownership of, as in The certificate of ownership was rightfully in my name. [Mid-1900s]
6. in one's own name. On one's own behalf, as in Mary signed the check for John in her own name. [Late 1800s]
The distinctions seem kind of sketchy, and the usage is not really explored. Maybe the OED has something.
More later.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
“In the name of…” is the proclamation that this is official business and the Queen and GOD are going to pummel you if you don’t do as the reader says. The true purpose of “In the name of..” is actually for the reader’s well being. It is just a disclaimer and he is forced to read it or his family dies. It is not unlike the disclaimer we have at the bottom of every email we write asking you not to shoot the messenger.
ReplyDelete"In the name of" .... simply invokes the authority that has given the power to that person to stab with the sword and take thy stuff.
ReplyDeleteOne may get a letter in the mail that would read: "In the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts ..... you owe more tax (sic).
If you don't pay tribute the authorities (that word again) will come and take your property and will arrest you. If you choose to flee across the river to hide and set up in another part of the land, the authorities will shout: "halt, police"! Which translated simply means "In the name of.... etc.... .
At least there you have the courts to appeal to.
If someone is chasing you and says: "stop in the name of the Lord!"... well then, you're simply screwed.
I agree with both of you about the consequences of the utterance. What I wonder about is the use of the "name" portion. "The King commands you to stop" is functionally the same as "Stop in the name of the King". But there is something about invoking the "name" instead of the actual person that I don't get. As I said in the original post, why bother with the "name" part? Cut to the chase, as it were.
ReplyDeleteNot that this is a research exercise but:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/in_the_name_of
I think it's old english.
It's a shame that they don't have the courtesy to say that anymore - before they kill you.
Gives the act sort of an aire of sophistication and class.