(M425) The army and corvée, or levy for forced labor, were chiefly obtained from the slaves, and above all from the serfs. A head of a family, or mother, was not liable. But young men and women had to serve a certain number of terms of service, seemingly six.(428) Hence it was of importance to the buyer of a slave to receive a guarantee that this claim had been satisfied. (M426) We have many examples of slaves who were skilled artisans. They had been taught a handicraft. Later we shall come across cases of apprenticeship of slaves to learn a craft. But all the artisans were not slaves. Indeed, some of the craftsmen, as goldsmiths, silversmiths, carpenters, were wealthy persons. (M427) As a rule, though the slave is named, his father is not. But, just as in mediæval times, a serf’s father is named. The serf’s holding seems to have been hereditary. But we have too few examples to be sure of our ground here. The slave’s father was not concerned in the sale, and that may be the sole reason why he is not named. Fathers sometimes sold their children to be slaves, then they are named. Such sales are not so unnatural as they appear. It was a sure provision for life for a child to sell him as slave to a family in good position. (M428) In the later Babylonian times, the almost total disappearance of the serf has been noted as very remarkable. But this may be entirely due to the nature of our documents. The temples owned a great deal of land and their slaves were in the condition of serfs. (M429) In later Babylonian times we have a very large number of examples of slave sales. So far as the formula of a deed of sale is concerned, there is nothing to distinguish from a sale of the ordinary type, thus marking the slave as a chattel. (M430) But there are several clauses, which directly illustrate the possession of slaves, their position and liabilities. One clause, frequent when slaves were either pledged or sold, was a guarantee on the part of the owner against a number of contingencies. These are not easy to understand. (M431) First we have the _amêlu siḫû_. _Siḫu_ means rebellion or civil war. Sennacherib was slain in such an uprising.(429) It may be that then the slave would be impressed for defence of law and order. Or it may be that _amêlu siḫû_ is the rebel, or mob, who might carry off the slave. Or the contingency contemplated may be that the slave should turn rebel and refuse to do his master’s bidding. The fact that a ship was also guaranteed against _amêlu siḫû_,(430) renders this less likely. A ship could not turn rebel. It is not unlikely that slaves often joined in the rebellions.