Among the ancient Arabs[1403] and Hebrews, fathers exercised very great rights over their families. According to the old law of Jahveism, a father might sell his child to relieve his own distress, or offer it to a creditor as a pledge.[1404] Death was the penalty for a child who struck a parent, or even cursed one;[1405] though the father himself could not inflict this penalty on his children, but had to appeal to the whole community.[1406] How important were the duties of the child to the parents, is shown in the primitive typical relation of Isaac to Abraham, and may, as Ewald remarks, be at once learned from the placing of the law on the subject among the Ten Commandments, and from its position there in immediate proximity to the commands relating to the duties of man towards God.[1407] According to Michaelis, there is nowhere the slightest trace of its having been the will of Moses that paternal authority and the subjection of sons should cease after a certain age.[1408] A Hebrew father not only disposed of his daughter’s hand, but chose wives for his sons,—the selection, however, being sometimes made by the mother.[1409] Judging from the marked severity of filial duties among the Egyptians, some of which are distinctly alluded to in the inscription of Thebes, we may conclude that, in Egypt, much more was expected from a son than in any European nation of the present day.[1410] And in the ‘Precepts of Ptah-Hotep,’ which have been called “the most ancient book in the world,” we read that the father ought to command, the son to obey:—“The son who accepts the word of his father will attain old age on that account. God wishes us to obey; disobedience is abhorrent to Him.”[1411]