Colonial agents often saw the value of improvising the corporal form of the oath for the smoother functioning of judicial bodies. In eighteenth-century Sri Lanka, the Dutch colonial government found that potential swearers were mostly nominal Christians who had few scruples about giving false oaths. This subtle resistance prompted the Dutch to make changes to accommodate local customs. Ultimately, the changes were of little use due to the mutual discrediting of potential oath-takers. A nominal Christian’s refusal to take the Dutch oath and preference for the local oath would be criticized, as also an acceptance of the Dutch form. Plural forms of the oath thus did not always provide the desired effect but rebounded in unexpected ways. This article argues that the study of mundane everyday judicial practice is needed to gain deeper insights into the functioning of pluralistic and colonial law.

中文翻译：

---

你知道第九条诫命吗？荷兰殖民地斯里兰卡宣誓的紧张局势

殖民代理人经常看到为司法机构更顺畅运作而即兴宣誓的形式的价值。在 18 世纪的斯里兰卡，荷兰殖民政府发现，潜在的咒骂者大多是名义上的基督徒，他们对作假誓几乎没有顾忌。这种微妙的抵抗促使荷兰人做出改变以适应当地习俗。最终，由于潜在的宣誓者相互诋毁，这些变化几乎没有用。名义上的基督徒拒绝接受荷兰誓言和偏爱当地誓言会受到批评，这也是对荷兰形式的接受。因此，多种形式的誓言并不总能提供预期的效果，而是以意想不到的方式反弹。