The case of Abraham's regarding one of his servants as his heir has also been adduced as an instance of adoption ; and this may possibly have been the case, though the mere fact that one born in his house was his heir by no means proves that he was his adopted son. The practice of slave adoption existed, however, among the Romans ; and, as such, is more than once referred to by St. Paul (Rom. viii. 15 ; Gal. iv. 5, 6), the transition from the condition of a slave to that of a son, and the privilege of applying the tender name of ' Father' to the former ' Master,' affording a beautiful illus tration of the change which takes place from the bondage of the law to the freedom and privileges of the Christian state.
The act of Jacob in placing his grandsons by Joseph on an equality with his sons, as if they had been his own children, is a nearer approach to a case of adoption ; though still the difference is great between this and the act to which the term adoption is usually applied.
The adoption of Moses by Pharaoh's daughter (Exod. ii. s- so) is an incident rather than a practice ; and besides it cannot be held as any evidence of patriarchal usage in this matter.
The right of a man who married an heiress to represent her in the family genealogy, was not a case of adoption proper, but a right secured by the law of property.
The following are among the foreign customs connected with adoption which are supposed to be alluded to in the New Testament. In John yiii. 36, ' If the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed,' is supposed by Grotius and other com mentators to refer to a custom in some of the cities of Greece, and elsewhere, called &SEX000€0-(a, whereby the son and heir was permitted to adopt brothers, and admit them to the same rights which he himself enjoyed. But it seems more likely that the reference was to the more familiar Roman custom, by which the son, after his father's death, often made free such as were born slaves in his house (Theophil. Antecensor, institut. Imp. 7nstinian. i.
6, 5). In Rom. viii. 23, vioCealay aretcaexbAceyot, ' anxiously waiting for the adoption,' the former word appears to be used in a sense different from that which it bears in ver. 15, and to signify the consunz»zation of the act there mentioned ; in which point of view it is conceived to apply to the two fold ceremony among the Romans. The one was the private act between the parties ; and if the person to be adopted was not already the slave of the adopter, this private transaction involved the purchase of him from his parents, when practicable. In this manner Caius and Lucius were purchased from their father Agrippa before their adoption by Augustus. The other was the public acknowledg ment of that act on the part of the adoptor, when the adopted person was solemnly avowed and declared to be his son. The peculiar force and propriety of such an allusion in an epistle to the Romans must be very evident.
In Gal. iv. 5, 6, there is a very clear allusion to the privilege of adopted slaves to address their former master by the endearing title of Abba, or Father. Selden has shewn that slaves were not allowed to use this word in addressing the master of the family to which they belonged, nor the corresponding title of Mama, mother, when speak ing to the mistress of it (De Succ. in Bona Defzenct. sauna'. Ifebr. c. iv.) A more minute investigation than would here be in place, might discover other allusions to the custom of adoption. The ideas and usages con nected with the adoption of an official successor are considered elsewhere. [KINGS, PRIESTS, PROPHETS.]