16 
Indiana University Studies 
to purchase it. Jeremiah was the nearest of kin and he ac- 
cepted Hanamel’s proposal. Thereupon the interesting part 
of the legal transaction began, and that was the execution of 
the conveyance. This was after written records were kept. 
Yet some of the old formalities were still observed. Every 
step in the transaction was public. First there was a weigh- 
ing out of the purchase-money. Then the deed was prepared 
in duplicate and one copy was sealed up and the other left 
open. After the deed had been prepared and signed it was 
subscribed by witnesses. Then the delivery occurred. This 
was thrice attested. “So I took the deed of purchase, both 
that which was sealed containing the terms and conditions, 
and that which was open: and I delivered the deed of pur- 
chase unto Baruch ... in the presence of Hanamel mine 
uncle’s son, and in the presence of the witnesses that sub- 
scribed the deed of purchase, before all the Jews that sat in 
the court of the guard.” Finally Baruch was charged with 
the duty of having the deeds recorded. “Take these deeds, 
this deed of purchase which is sealed, and this deed which is 
open, and put them in an earthen vessel (place them on rec- 
ord) ; that they may continue many days .” 55 
In Leviticus, which was written after the Babylonian cap- 
tivity, occurs an account of a trial for blasphemy. The trial 
of this case is credited to Moses but it probably was tried by 
someone else, and much later in Hebrew history than the time 
of Moses. In the first place the Hebrews did not develop a 
criminal law until late in their history, and in the second place 
in the early stages of society the gods were allowed to take 
care of their own affairs. A statement in the book of Judges 56 
“if he be a god let him plead for himself because someone has 
cast down his altar”, shows that in the time of the Judges 
(military leaders, not elders) blasphemy had not yet become 
a crime. In this case the son of an Israelitish woman (named 
Shelomith) and of an Egyptian father, and a man of Israel 
strove together and the son of Shelomith blasphemed Jehovah. 
For this he was brought before the court for trial. The first 
question to decide was whether or not this was a crime, and 
this question was decided in the affirmative. Then came the 
question, Was the son of an Egyptian amenable to the law? 
This also was answered in the affirmative, probably because 
55 32 Jer. 6-15. 
66 6 Judg. 25-32, 
