[105] Douglas, Confucianism and Taouism, p. 118.
[106] Griffis, Corea, pp. 236, 259.
[107] Rein, Japan, p. 427. Griffis, Religions of Japan, p. 122 sq.
[108] Griffis, Religions of Japan, p. 148.
[109] Idem, Mikado’s Empire, p. 555. Cf. Rein, Japan, p. 427.
[110] Griffis, Corea, p. 259.
It is the general opinion of Assyriologists that in ancient Chaldæa, at least in the early period of its history, the father had absolute authority over all the members of his household.[111] Anything undertaken by them without his consent was held invalid in the eyes of the law,[112] and a disobedient son might be sold as a slave.[113] According to the Laws of Ḫammurabi, a man might give his son or daughter as a hostage for debts;[114] but he could not disown his children at discretion. It is said that if he wishes to cut off his son he must declare his intention to the judge, whereupon “the judge shall enquire into his reasons, and if the son has not committed a heavy crime which cuts off from sonship, the father shall not cut off his son from sonship.”[115] Professor Hommel believes that the mother’s authority over her children was as great as the father’s,[116] whereas Meissner concludes that it was less, from the fact that her children are not seldom found to be at law with her in matters of succession.[117] Among the Hebrews a father might sell his child to relieve his own distress, or offer it to a creditor as a pledge.[118] He had not only unlimited power to marry his daughters, but even to sell them as maids into concubinage, though not to a foreign people.[119] He also chose wives for his sons;[120] and there is no indication that the subjection of sons ceased after a certain age.[121] How important were the duties of the child to the parents is shown in the primitive typical relation of Isaac to Abraham, and may be at once learned from the placing of the law on the subject among the Ten Commandments, and from its position there in the immediate proximity to the commands relating to the duties of man towards God.[122] Philo Judæus observes that it occupies this position because parents are something between divine and human nature, partaking of both—of human nature inasmuch as it is plain that they have been born and that they will die, and of divine nature because they have engendered other beings, and have brought what did not exist into existence. What God is to the world, that parents are to their children; they are “the visible gods.”[123] In Muhammedan countries parents have practically great authority over their children. Should a father exceed the bounds of moderation or justice in chastising his son, the idea of prosecuting him would hardly occur to anyone, the injured party being prevented by public opinion, if not by habit and feeling, from appealing against his own father.[124] Disobedience to parents is considered by Moslems as one of the greatest of sins, and is put, in point of heinousness, on a par with idolatry, murder, and desertion in an expedition against infidels. “An undutiful child,” says Mr. Lane, “is very seldom heard of among the Egyptians or the Arabs in general…. Sons scarcely sit or eat or smoke in the presence of the father, unless bidden to do so.”[125] In Morocco it is curious to see big, grown-up sons sneak away as soon as they hear their father’s steps, or to notice their absolute reticence in his presence. Children’s deference for their mothers is less formal, but almost equally great.[126]
[111] Oppert, in Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen, 1879, p. 1604 sqq. Hommel, Die semitischen Völker und Sprachen, i. 416. Meissner, Beiträge zum altbabylonischen Privatrecht, p. 14 sq.
[112] Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, p. 134.
[113] Hommel, op. cit. i. 416. Meissner, op. cit. p. 1.