Willis: Hebrew Law 
9 
this result thru the substitution of the redemption of the first- 
born . 30 
The wife could not own property apart from the husband. 
The husband bought the wife . 31 If he tired of her he could 
dismiss her, that is, divorce her by sending her away, as 
Abraham did H agar . 3 2 Samson’s father-in-law exercised his 
patriarchal power in taking Samson’s wife away from him and 
giving her to his companion . 33 The patriarch (head of the 
family, or eldest male parent) had the power to sell his prop- 
erty, including wife and children, to give his name to the 
family — which included those descended from the same com- 
mon ancestor, and to name his successor to step into his place, 
as Isaac did Jacob . 34 Upon the death of Terah, Abraham suc- 
ceeded to the headship, but a nephew, Lot, remained with him. 
The head of the family was the proper person to deal with 
another family. So, when Lot was taken prisoner, Abraham 
rescued him. Children and servants were in the same status, 
and servants born in the house inherited. The patriarch con- 
ducted sacrifices. This was done even by David . 35 The loose 
state of society resulting from such a system is shown by the 
incidents of the stealing of the wives 36 and the death of the 
concubine . 37 The patriarch remained supreme in internal 
family affairs long after his other powers were taken away 
from him. The patriarchal family was something like a cor- 
poration in its immortality. There was a solidarity in this 
institution which made the act of one member of the family 
the act of all, and this idea was extended to the clan, to the 
tribe, and finally to the whole nation. Hence the blood feuds. 
Children were punished for the wrongs of the parents, and 
vice versa . 38 The development of this idea in the course of 
time became a limitation on the patriarch’s power so far as 
property was concerned, for even he was made subordinate 
to the family and made to hold the possession of property in a 
sort of trust, so that he could not give it away or divert it to 
another family. This explains the incident of Lot’s daugh- 
ters. Children were liable for the debts of their father . 39 It 
30 13 Exod. 11-13. 
31 34 Gen. 11-12. 
32 16 Gen. 3 ; 21 Gen. 14. 
33 14 Judg. 19-20 ; 15 Judg. 2. 
34 3 Gen. 16; 31 Gen. 31 ; 21 Exod. 8; 24 Deut. 1 ; 5 Neh. 5; 15 Judg. 2. 
35 2 0 Gen. 2 ; 38 Gen. 24 ; 42 Gen. 37 ; 9 Judg. 30-40 ; 20 I Sam. 6. 
36 21 Judg. 23. 
37 19 Judg. 
38 7 Josh. 24-25; 21 II Sam. 5-9 ; 9 II Kings 25-26; 34 Gen. 30. 
39 3 0 II Kings 1. 
