The distinctive character of the slave is that he is fatherless by status. It is usual in legal documents to name the father and often the grandfather of the free contracting parties, the witnesses, judges, scribes, &c. No slave, unless we reckon as such a freeman temporarily reduced to slavery, is ever given as son of So-and-so. In fact, ‘the sons of fathers’, _mâr banûtu_, such as were the _amêlu_ and _mushkênu_, are very clearly men of birth. Their birth, marriage, and death were registered and recorded, so that it was easy to trace family descent for many generations. Enough documents are still preserved to us to compile some family trees for a hundred years or more. But a slave was without family. He was even forbidden in some cases to inquire into his real descent. The family honour was very strictly guarded. But though occupying so low a grade of society, we have seen that slaves could rise not only to freedom but become adopted into the patrician ranks. This privilege might be forfeited and the slave might be again enslaved without hope of emancipation. There was a mark of the slave which was put upon him by a _gallabu_, the barber and surgeon. Some maintain that this mark was a shaving of the head or forelock in a peculiar way. The slave would thus betray his condition, much as a convict does. But this would be soon outgrown and the slave mark was sometimes an irradicable mark; it is referred to as on the arm, and the surgeon could remove it. So some rather think of a tattooed mark. A barber might be induced by a fraudulent possessor of a slave to remove his old slave mark, but if he could be shown to have done this wittingly he lost his hands. If he could prove his innocence of collusion he was released on oath, but the fraudulent owner was treated as a slave-stealer and put to death. If a slave ran away and was caught, his captor was bound to carry him back to his owner, and was then rewarded by statute with a payment of two shekels (§ 17). If the captor kept him hidden in his own house and did not give him to the town crier he was treated as a slave-stealer and put to death (§ 15). If the slave broke away from his captor, the latter had to swear to his non-complicity in the escape and was then free of blame. The slave was not kept in confinement as a rule; he might freely go about the city, and was usually completely trusted to do errands, but he could not leave the city without his master’s consent. If a fugitive slave was captured and would not name his master, he was to be taken to the palace or governor’s house and there put to the question, and if possible restored to his owner. If such could not be found, the slave was added to the public slaves, available for the _corvée_. Harbouring a fugitive slave was punished with death. The slave when recovered by his master might be put in chains.