Whether, therefore, the root of the Hebrew _b[)e]reeth_ means, as is variously claimed, "to cut," "to fetter," "to bind together," "to fix," "to establish," "to pour out," or "to eat," it is easy to see how these words may have been taken as referring to the one primitive idea of a compassed and established union.[2] So in the Greek words _diath[=e]k[=e]_ and _horkion_ it can readily be seen that the references to the new placing or disposing of the parties, to their solemn appeal to God or the gods in the covenanting, and to the testament to take effect after the death of the testator, or to the means employed in this transaction, are alike consistent with the primitive idea of a covenant in God's sight by which one gives over one's very self, or one's entire possessions, to another. The pledged or merged personality of the two covenantors fully accounts for the different suggested references of the variously employed words. [2] See Gesenius's _Hebraeisches und Aramaeisches Wörterbuch_, 12th ed., p. 120; Norwach's _Lehrbuch der Hebræischen Archæologie_, I., p. 358, note 1; Friedrich Delitzsch's _The Hebrew Language Viewed in the Light of Assyrian Research_, p. 41; _Blood Covenant_, 2d ed., p. 264. True marriage is thus a covenant, instead of an arrangement. The twain become no longer two, but one; each is given to the other; their separate identity is lost in their common life. A ring, a bracelet, a band, has been from time immemorial the symbol and pledge of such an indissoluble union.[3] [3] _Blood Covenant_, 2d ed., pp. 64, 75, 77. Men have thus, many times and in many ways, signified their covenanting, and their consequent interchange of personality and of being, by the exchange of certain various tokens and symbols; but these exchanges have not in any sense been the covenant itself, they have simply borne witness to a covenant. Thus men have exchanged pledges of their covenant to be worn as phylacteries, or caskets, or amulets, or belts, on neck, or forehead, or arm, or body;[4] they have exchanged weapons of warfare or of the chase; they have exchanged articles of ordinary dress, or of ornament, or of special utility;[5] they have exchanged with each other their personal names.[6] All these have been in token of an accomplished covenant, but they have not been forms or rites of the covenant itself. [4] _Blood Covenant_, 2d ed., pp. 232-238, 326-330. [5] _Ibid._, pp. 14, 24, 28, 35 f., 62, 270; 1 Sam. 18 : 4; 20 : 1-13. [6] _Ibid._, 2d ed., p. 334 f.