without? for I have prepared the house, and room for the camels.” And on the other hand, Jacob, though he has the birthright, and is to be head of his tribe, binds himself to serve Laban for twice seven years, not exactly as a bondman, but doing the same kind of work as the bondmen did, and surrendering his personal liberty to his master in a way which would not now be permitted (except in the peculiar case of military service) by the laws of any country in which civilized morality prevails.
The identity of interest between the Patriarchal chief and his servant, and the reliance consequently placed by the chief in the servant’s loyalty, which we have noted in the story of Abraham’s steward, appear elsewhere also. “When Abraham heard that his brother (Lot) was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan.” The herdmen of Abraham and Lot (Gen. xiii.) and the herdmen of Isaac and Gerar (Gen. xxvi.) strive of their own accord for the pastures and the wells of springing water, evidently regarding the interest of their master as their own.
So much respecting the nature of bondage in the patriarchal state. It seems to bear little resemblance to the condition of the gangs of negro chattels who are driven out under the lash of an overseer to plant cotton in America, and who are slaves to the tyrannical cruelty and lust of the white members of their owner’s family, as well as to the avarice of their owner. When we find a negro standing in the same relation to his
